The PTAB disagreed. It found that Petitioner’s modification would result in the repositioning and rotating of several parts of the wall system, making the change nonobvious. Moreover, the PTAB considered the testimony of Petitioner’s expert conclusory. Specifically, the PTAB explained that the expert failed to show how the modified system would work in the same manner as the original arrangement. Finally, the PTAB considered an alternative modification proposed by Petitioner, which involved orienting a horizontal member vertically and replacing a bayonet with another bayonet of a different shape. Similarly, the PTAB concluded that Petitioner failed to show this modification would have been obvious to a skilled artisan. The PTAB also did not give the expert’s conclusory opinion much weight. Because neither proposed modification to the prior art would have been obvious, the PTAB denied the petition for IPR review.
Allsteel Inc. v. Dirtt Env’t Solutions Ltd., Case IPR201501690 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2016) [Medley (opinion), Daniels, and Harlow].
