In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit provided guidance on the qualification of expert witnesses in #patent cases.
The case in question centered on a challenge to the plaintiff’s technical expert. Defense counsel argued that the expert lacked specific experience in diagnostic imaging at the time of the alleged invention. They attempted to differentiate this from the expert’s qualifications at the time of testimony.
However, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) rejected this argument. In their opinion, available here, the CAFC stated that the plaintiff “points to no legal support for the supposed requirement that an expert attain his or her expertise prior to a patent’s effective date.”
The Court further elaborated on requirements for expert qualification:
“All that is required ‘to be qualified to offer expert testimony on issues from the vantage point of an ordinarily skilled artisan in a patent case’ is that ‘an expert must at a minimum possess ordinary skill in the art.’… Our precedent is clear — nothing more is required.”
The timing of an expert’s acquisition of skills is not a determining factor in their qualification. Instead, the focus should be on whether the expert possesses the requisite “ordinary skill in the art” at the time of testimony.
Leave a Reply