SUMMARY JUDGMENT REVERSED BECAUSE OF FACTS IN DISPUTE ABOUT WHETHER PRIOR ART IS ANALGOUS

Andersen Corporation v. Pella Corporation, [2007-1536] (November 19, 2008) [SCHALL, Rader, Alsup] NON-PRECEDENTIAL The Federal Circuit reversed summary judgment that 6,880,612 was invalid for obviousness, questioning whether the prior art was analogous.
DISCUSSION: The district court held that the invention claimed in the ’612 patent was rendered obvious by an electromagnetic-shielding mesh manufactured by TWP, Inc. (“TWP”) in combination with Japanese Patent No. 195646, disclosing a method of coating a screen with light absorbable black color to reduce reflection. The Federal Circuit found that genuine issues of material fact exist as to whether it would have been obvious to an insect screen designer of ordinary skill to use the TWP mesh as screening material for a reduced visibility insect screen. While agreeing that common sense and the nature of the problem to be solved could lead an insect screen designer to a mesh primarily used for a purpose besides insect screens, the Federal Circuit found that the patentee raised a genuine issue of fact as to whether the electromagnetic-shielding mesh would have been part of the field of invention searched by an insect screen designer and whether such an alternative use would have been obvious.