Nichia Corporation, et al. v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd., et al.

This Court has repeatedly held that whether a patent is invalid as obvious is a question of law, though it may depend on subsidiary factual findings. KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 418, 427 (2007); Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City, 383 U.S. 1, 17–18 (1966). Should an appellate court review the ultimate legal question of obviousness de novo, as the Seventh and Ninth Circuits have held and as the Federal Circuit held before 2012, or must the appellate court defer to a jury’s conclusion even on the ultimate legal question, as the Federal Circuit has repeatedly held in patent cases since 2012?

Alternatively, if this Court were to conclude that obviousness presents a “mixed” question of law and fact, as the Federal Circuit now treats it, should this Court grant certiorari, vacate, and remand this case to determine whether appellate review of that “mixed” question should be de novo or deferential in light of U.S. Bank National Association ex rel. CWCapital Asset Management LLC v. Village at Lakeridge, LLC, 138 S. Ct. 960, 967 (2018), a case decided after the Federal Circuit decision here?