Latest Posts › Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

Share:

Merger of District Court Dismissals Torpedoes Appeal from PTAB Decision at Federal Circuit

The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal of a final written decision in an IPR based on issue preclusion where a district court had dismissed a complaint finding the patent claims subject-matter ineligible. The patentee had...more

Patentee’s Own Clinical Trial Renders Unpatentable Patent Claims Directed to Antibody Treatment

In a final written decision of an inter partes review proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board found all 12 claims of a challenged patent unpatentable as either anticipated or obvious. Each ground of unpatentability...more

In IPR, No Collateral Estoppel Based on § 101 Ruling in District Court

A panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted inter partes review of a patent, rejecting the patent owner’s assertion that the petitioner’s obviousness arguments were collaterally estopped by a district court’s...more

Invalidity Defenses Will Not Be Stricken at Pleading Stage Despite Defendant’s Earlier PGR Petition

A district court has denied a patent owner’s motion to strike wholesale a defendant’s affirmative defense of invalidity. The key issue in the motion to strike was the application of the estoppel provision of 35 U.S.C. §...more

Federal Circuit: Skepticism of FDA Supports Finding of Nonobviousness and Patent Eligibility Not Within Scope of Appeal of an IPR

The Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding nonobvious the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209 (the “’209 Patent”), which are directed to a method of treating cancer. The claims...more

Estoppel Applies to “Known or Used” Prior Art if PTAB Considered Corresponding Written References

A district court in California has granted-in-part a Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of no invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 103 due to inter partes review (IPR) estoppel. During the pendency of the litigation, Defendants...more

Accused Infringer Estopped from Asserting Prior Art Disclosed in Invalidity Contentions

In an order issued on April 4, 2018, Judge Lynn granted plaintiff ZitoVault’s motion for summary judgment under 35 U.S.C. 315(e)(2), holding that defendant IBM is estopped from asserting invalidity defenses based on prior art...more

IP Newsflash - April 2015

DISTRICT COURT CASES - Patent Directed to Online Auction Held Invalid Under § 101 - A district court recently granted a defendant’s motion for judgment on the pleadings, holding that a patent directed to an...more

9 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide