Administrative Agency Civil Procedure Science, Computers & Technology

Read need-to-know updates, commentary, and analysis on Administrative Agency issues written by leading professionals.
News & Analysis as of

No Exception for Energy Management Patent—CBM Review Instituted - Opower Inc. v. Cleantech Business Solutions

In its decision to institute a covered business method (CBM) patent review of an energy management patent, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) agreed with the petitioner...more

MBHB Snippets: Review of Developments in Intellectual Property Law: Winter 2015 - Vol. 13, Issue 1

In This Issue: - Tips for Developing a Cost-Effective Foreign Patent Strategy - Supreme Court Holds that Trademark Tacking Should be Decided by a Jury in Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank - Amending...more

Glenmark Generics Ltd. v. Ferring B.V.,

Case Name: Civ. No. 3:14-cv-422-HEH, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 146528 (E.D. Va. Oct. 14, 2014) (Hudson, J.) (Where patent holder disclaims patent and asks FDA to delist, but patent remains in Orange Book, declaratory judgment...more

Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Multi-Petition Challenges of a Patent

Background – Multiple Petitions - Multiple Petition Filings in PTAB Trials (IPR/PGR/CBM) - •The statutes for IPR, PGR and CBM do not provide many limits on filing of petitions –Numerous patents have been...more

District Court Denies Motion to Lift Stay Pending Inter Partes Review Even Where Plaintiff Agreed to Not Pursue Claims That Were...

Barco filed a patent infringement action in September 2011 against Defendants Eizo Nanao Corporation and Eizo Nanao Technologies, Inc. ("Eizo"), alleging that Eizo infringed various claims in U.S. Patent No. 7,639,849 (the...more

Limitations on New Arguments and Legal Authority Presented at Oral Hearing - Intri-Plex Technologies Inc. v. Saint-Gobain...

The U. S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) provided further guidance as to what new matter may properly be raised during oral argument, explaining that parties may not present new...more

Divided Federal Circuit Panel Upholds Patent Office’s “Broadest Reasonable Interpretation” Standard for Construing Claims in...

In a 2-1 decision in In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC, No. 14-1301 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2015), the Federal Circuit recently held that the Patent Office may apply the “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard to construe...more

Supplementing Information - Post-Institution Pacific Market International, LLC v. Ignite USA, LLC

Addressing a motion to submit supplemental information after institution, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) granted the motion, finding that the information—a supplemental...more

Declarant Must Be Made Available for Deposition in the United States - Square, Inc. v. REM Holdings 3, LLC

Addressing the location of a deposition of patent owner’s declarant, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that, absent an agreement between the parties to...more

Final Decision in NuVasive’s Inter Partes Review of Warsaw Orthopedic Patent

The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (the “Board”) recently issued Final Written Decisions disposing of two inter partes reviews that NuVasive filed in mid-2013 regarding U.S. patent number 8,444,696 (the ’696 Patent). The ’696...more

District Court Action Dismissed Without Prejudice Does Not Bar Filing of IPR Petition - Nautique Boat Co., Inc. v. Malibu Boats,...

Addressing whether a district court action dismissed without prejudice bars a filing of an inter partes review (IPR) petition under 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal...more

If It’s Important, Don’t Put It in a Footnote - Cisco Sys., Inc. v. C-Cation Techs.

In a decision recently designated as “informative” and addressing the issue of using footnotes to cite to a 200-plus-page declaration to support conclusory statements in an inter partes (IPR) review petition, the Patent Trial...more

Comments on USPTO’s Interim Patent Eligibility Guidance (Part I)

On December 16, 2014 the USPTO issued its 2014 Interim Guidance on Subject Matter Eligibility. In the introduction, the Guidance states that it “is responsive to the public comments received pertaining to the March 2014...more

Game Over for Myriad -- Update: (Or, and then there was one were none)

As discussed for the past month, Myriad has finally given up trying to defend its BRCA gene testing franchise. The one remaining matter, Myriad's case against GeneDx has settled, as announced by the company today....more

Patentability Under § 112 ¶ 2 May Be Raised in CBM Patent Review - Chicago Mercantile Exchange, Inc. v. 5th Market, Inc.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office affirmed its earlier determination that a patent was a covered business method (CBM) patent that it was subject to review on questions...more

Federal Circuit IPR Scoreboard PTAB: 2 Patent Owner: 0

Last week the Federal Circuit issued its first decision in an appeal of a final decision from a post-issuance review proceeding under the America Invents Act. In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and...more

IP Newsflash - February 2015 #2

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Federal Circuit Declines to Extend Patent Exhaustion Doctrine - In a February 10, 2015 decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a grant of summary judgment of non-infringement under the...more

Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.,

Case Name: Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., No. 2014-1693, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 22903 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 5, 2014) (Circuit Judges Dyk, Taranto, and Chen presiding; Opinion by Taranto, J.) (appeal from N.D. Cal, Chesney, J.) (A...more

District Court Grants Stay Before The PTO Institutes An IPR

In MLC Intellectual Property, LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc., Case No. 14-cv-3657 (N.D. Cal.), MLC filed its lawsuit on August 12, 2014, accusing Micron of infringing U.S. Patent No. 5,764,571 ("the '571 patent"). On October...more

Mylan Pharms., Inc. v. FDA

Case Name: Mylan Pharms., Inc. v. FDA, Civ. Nos. 14-1522, 14-1529, 14-1593, 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 24022 (4th Cir. Dec. 16, 2014) (Circuit Judges Wilkinson, Shedd, and Wynn presiding; Opinion by Wynn, J.) (Appeal from N.D....more

Citizen Petitions Aimed at Delaying Generic Competition Remain a Concern

Despite Congress enacting legislation in 2007 to curb misuse, citizen petitions submitted by pharmaceutical companies to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) may still provide a mechanism for competitors to delay the...more

No Declaratory Jurisdiction Without Biosimilarity Application on File with FDA - Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc.

Avoiding an interpretation of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit invoked traditional case or controversy principles to affirm the dismissal of a...more

Rep. Goodlatte Introduces His Patent Reform Bill (Again) -- Part II

As discussed in a prior post, Rep. Bob Goodlatte (R, VA-6th) and a bipartisan collection of sponsors* introduced a bill, once again entitled the "Innovation Act" (H.R. 3309 in the last Congress; H.R. 9 in this one) directed...more

IP Newsflash - February 2015

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - PTAB’s Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard Affirmed by Fed. Circuit in First Ever IPR Appeal - On Wednesday, February 4, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC)...more

Federal Circuit Review | January 2015

RAND Commitment Relevant to Damages - In ERICSSON, INC. v. D-LINK SYSTEMS, INC., Appeal Nos. 2013-1625, -1631, -1632, and -1633, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part the district court’s judgment...more

168 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 7

Follow Administrative Agency Updates on: