))
Patenting for Inventors Ep. 150: What is Obviousness? A “Reasonable Expectation of Success” or “Predictable Results”?
Fetch error
Hmmm there seems to be a problem fetching this series right now.
Last successful fetch was on August 12, 2025 13:11 (
What now? This series will be checked again in the next day. If you believe it should be working, please verify the publisher's feed link below is valid and includes actual episode links. You can contact support to request the feed be immediately fetched.
Manage episode 495159615 series 3678322
🎙 Hosted by Adam Diament, Registered Patent Attorney | Partner, Nolan Heimann LLP
When is an invention too obvious to be patented?
In this episode, Adam Diament unpacks one of the most important (and misunderstood) concepts in patent law: obviousness. He focuses on the recent case of Vanda Pharmaceuticals vs. Teva Pharmaceuticals, where the Federal Circuit used the “reasonable expectation of success” standard—ultimately invalidating Vanda’s patent for Hetlioz.
Tune in to learn:
- The difference between “reasonable expectation of success” and “predictable results”
- How biotech and pharma inventions are especially affected
- Why the Supreme Court’s refusal to hear the case cements this standard—for now
- What this means for inventors and attorneys going forward
📌 Mentioned in this episode:
– Vanda v. Teva
– Hetlioz (treatment for sleep disorders)
– Supreme Court’s 2024 cert denial
– Prior episodes on obviousness: Ep. 3, 47, 48, 49, 143
🎧 Subscribe to the full series at nolanheimann.com/podcast
🧠 Knowledge is power—especially when it’s not obvious.
13 episodes
Share
