ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC.
Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: During vacancies of Director and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,...more
INTEL CORPORATION v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED -
Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Indefinite claims do not preclude patentability analysis at the PTAB....more
12/30/2021
/ Claim Construction ,
Intel ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm
INTEL CORPORATION v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED -
Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A “generic” motivation to combine that has broad appeal or applicability is not...more
12/30/2021
/ Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Expert Testimony ,
Intel ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Qualcomm
Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
TQ DELTA, LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Summary: Findings of fact at the PTAB must be supported by substantial evidence, and conclusory expert...more
IN RE: IPR LICENSING, INC., -
Before O’Malley, Newman, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Establishing a motivation to combine two references for an obviousness determination in an IPR...more
11/27/2019
/ Admissible Evidence ,
Appeals ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inadmissible Evidence ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Obviousness ,
Partial Reversal ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand
CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY v. GAMON PLUS, INC.
Before Prost, Newman and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A proper primary reference can have slight differences in design if, in light of overall...more
10/1/2019
/ Appeals ,
Campbell Soup Company ,
Design Patent ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
Prior Art ,
Section 103 ,
Vacated
REGENTS OF THE UNIV. OF MINN. v. LSI CORPORATION -
Before Dyk, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: State sovereign immunity does not apply to IPR proceedings asserted against...more
AVX CORPORATION V. PRESIDIO COMPONENTS, INC.
Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent and Trial Appeal Board.
Summary: Appellants from an IPR decision to the Federal Circuit must have concrete claims...more
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Newman, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the PTAB.
Summary: Patent Owner Vertnetx Inc. (“Virnetx”) was collaterally estopped from arguing that a reference was not a printed publication...more
12/11/2018
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Appellate Record ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Failure To Preserve ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pre-AIA Patents ,
Printed Publications ,
Retroactive Application ,
Rule 36
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A petitioner in an Inter Partes Review may introduce new evidence not included in its petition if: 1)...more
The STRONGER (Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience) Patents Act of 2017 was recently introduced in the Senate by a bipartisan group led by Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.) and co-sponsored...more
8/14/2017
/ America Invents Act ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Amendments ,
Claim Construction ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Interlocutory Appeals ,
Legislative Agendas ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Proposed Legislation ,
Standing