Latest Publications

Share:

Reconsideration of Institution Decisions Is Also “Final and Nonappealable”

In an opinion addressing whether a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) to reconsider a decision on institution is “final and nonappealable,” the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reaffirmed...more

Claims Withdrawn Because of Rejection May Limit Claim Scope **WEB ONLY**

In an opinion addressing prosecution history estoppel, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision granting summary judgment of non-infringement, finding that the patentee was estopped...more

Post-Grant Review May Be Used to Invalidate Patents Directed to Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter

Addressing patent-eligible subject matter issues, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) issued a final written decision in a post-grant review (PGR) finding all claims of a newly issued patent unpatentable under...more

When Distinguishing Statements May Be Considered Disclaimers of Claim Scope

Addressing disclaimer of claim scope, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment of non-infringement, finding that the patentee clearly and unmistakably disclaimed...more

Inter Partes Review Institution Decisions Not Appealable, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Remains Standard

In Depth - The Supreme Court of the United States (Justice Breyer writing for the majority) affirmed a US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision barring judicial review of most decisions regarding institution...more

PTAB Disinclined to Tailor Protective Orders or Interfere with Protective Orders Issued in Parallel Proceedings - ASML Neth. B.V....

In a pair of orders addressing confidential information acquired in parallel proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied (1) a request to modify the Board’s default protective order to protect...more

You Can’t Spell “Pressurized Collection Vessel” Without “Collection” (Akzo Nobel Coatings, Inc. v. Dow Chem. Co.)

In an opinion addressing claim construction, infringement and indefiniteness, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s findings that the asserted claims were not indefinite and not...more

Joinder Motions Do Not Nullify the One-Year Statutory Bar for Petitions - ZTE Corp. v. Adaptix, Inc.

Addressing whether the concurrent filing of a motion for joinder is sufficient to overcome the one-year statutory bar on inter partes review (IPR) petitions, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied a...more

Design Patentees Are Entitled to Infringers’ Unapportioned Total Profits - Nordock, Inc. v. Systems Inc.

In an opinion addressing the proper measure of damages for design patent infringement, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a district court’s order denying a motion for a new trial on...more

Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Persists as Standard for Claim Construction in AIA Proceedings - In re Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC

In a deeply divided opinion addressing the claim construction standard in post-grant America Invents Act (AIA) proceedings, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for rehearing en banc, leaving in...more

No Substantial Change in Standard for Indefiniteness Under “Reasonable Certainty” Test - Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus,...

In an opinion addressing the standard for indefiniteness in view of the Supreme Court of the United States’ 2014 “reasonable certainty” test, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit maintained its reversal of the...more

PTO Revival Rulings Are Not Subject to Collateral Attacks by Third Parties - Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC v. Lee

Addressing whether third parties have the right to challenge a patent revival ruling by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Reduced Deposition Time in Related AIA Proceedings - Petroleum Geo-Services Inc. v. WesternGeco LLC

In an order regarding deposition times for expert witnesses in three related inter partes reviews (IPRs), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) ruled that total deposition time...more

Patent Co-Owners Are Necessary Parties to Infringement Suits, but Cannot Ordinarily Be Involuntarily Joined

STC.UNM v. Intel Corp. - In a divided opinion addressing whether a patent co-owner has a substantive right not to join in an infringement suit, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for...more

Counsel May Confer with a Witness Between Cross-Examination and Re-Cross, but the Witness Might Be Re-Crossed on the Substance of...

Organik Kimya AS v. Rohm and Haas Co. - In an order regarding allowable communications between counsel and witness, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held that counsel may confer with a witness between the end...more

Need Nexus Between the Claimed Feature and the Marketed Product to Demonstrate Commercial Success

St. Jude Med., Cardiology Div., Inc. v. The Bd. of Regents of the Univ. of Mich. - In the final written decision of an inter partes review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) canceled all claims at issue on...more

Director’s Decision on Inter Partes Review Institution Is the Final Word

St. Jude Med., Cardiology Div., Inc. v. Volcano Corp.; In re Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC; In re The Procter & Gamble Co. - In three opinions, each addressing a slightly different issue regarding the reviewability of...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 10, October 2013

No Case or Controversy in DJ Against Patentee Who Sued Manufacturer’s Customers: Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Alberta Telecommunications Research Center - In a non-precedential opinion addressing declaratory judgment...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 6, June 2013

Patents / Patent Eligible Subject Matter - Supreme Court to Myriad: Isolated DNA Sequences Are Not Patent-Eligible Subject Matter -- AMP et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc.: In a 9–0 decision the Supreme...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 4, April 2013

Obviousness-Type Double Patenting May Exist When There Is Neither Common Ownership nor Common Inventorship - Addressing an obviousness-type double patenting rejection, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

20 Results
/
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence,
in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!