NantKwest, Inc. v. Matal, No. 15-2095 (Fed. Cir. May 3, 2017)

From the Opinion

The passage below is extracted verbatim from the opening of the document. It has not been editorially summarized — consult the full opinion for the court's complete reasoning.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) rejected claims 20, 26, and 27 of U.S. Patent Application No. 10/008,955 (“’955 patent application”) on the ground that the claim s would have been obvious. NantKwest sought review in district court, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 145, asserting that claims 20, 26, and 27 of the application were nonobvious . The district court granted the USPTO’s motion for summary judgment of obviou s- ness. NantKwest appeals. We affirm.