Intellectual Property Administrative Agency Civil Procedure

Read Intellectual Property Law updates, alerts, news, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

Federal Circuit Affirms Tygacil Formulation Patent

In Apotex, Inc. v. Wyeth LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding that Apotex had failed to show that claims directed to a specific formulation of tigecycline...more

Is Final Really Final? Alternative Patent Prosecution Routes after a Final Office Action

The prosecution of a patent application before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) can be a prolonged and costly process. The patent prosecution process can include the issuance of an Office Action by the USPTO and...more

Federal Circuit Grants En Banc Review of PTAB Amendment Practice

On August 12, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted rehearing en banc to appellants in In re Aqua Products, Inc to consider the procedures used by the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to...more

PTAB Misapplied Common Sense in Finding Claims Obvious

In Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., [2015-2073] (August 10, 2016) the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB Final Written Decision that claims 1-2, 8, 14-17, 20-21, 23-24, 30, 36-39, and 42-43 of U.S. Patent No. 7,917,843 were...more

Apotex Inc. v. Wyeth LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Perhaps the most significant Supreme Court decision in the past quarter century for the working patent practitioner is Dickinson v. Zurko, which strictly speaking is less a patent case than an administrative law decision. ...more

“Substantial Evidence” Hurdle is Substantially Difficult to Overcome

One of the less appreciated hurdles to a successful appeal of a Final Written Decision in an IPR proceeding is the “substantial evidence” standard of review the Federal Circuit applies to the Graham factors that underlie a...more

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands PTAB Obviousness Determination Not Supported by Adequate Reasoned Explanation

In In re Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc., 2015-1050, 2015-1058 (August 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded the PTAB’s decision in IPR2013-00206 and IPR2013-00208 that claims 1–8 and 17–23 of...more

USPTO Updates Accelerated Examination Program – Program Still Creates a Record That Could Be Cited Against Patent Owners in...

Yesterday, the USPTO published a notice updating the accelerated examination program and noting that the USPTO plans to publish a request for comments to seek public input on whether there is value in retaining the program....more

In re Aqua Products, Inc. -- CAFC Grants Rehearing En Banc to Consider PTAB Motions to Amend

On Friday, August 13, 2016, the Federal Circuit granted a petition for rehearing en banc filed in the In re Aqua Products, Inc. case to consider two questions related to the PTAB's treatment of Motions to Amend in IPR...more

En Banc Federal Circuit To Review Standards for Amending Claims During AIA Proceedings

In a rare grant of a petition for rehearing en banc, the court decided that an appeal “warrants en banc consideration” of who bears what burden when amending in an IPR. In re: Aqua Products, No. 15-1177, slip op. at 2 (Fed....more

BRI Does Not Apply if Patent Expires Any Time During Reexamination Proceeding

In In Re CSB-System International, Inc., [2015-1832] (August 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB erred in applying a broadest reasonable interpretation claim construction, instead of a Phillips claim...more

Federal Circuit To Review IPR Claim Amendment Rules En Banc

The Federal Circuit will rehear en banc the appeal In re: Aqua Products, Inc., No. 2015-1177 to address whether the PTAB’s rules requiring the Patent Owner to demonstrate the patentability of proposed amended claims are...more

In re Magnum Oil Tools Int'l, Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

McClinton Energy Group filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition against all claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,079,413, owned by Magnum Oil Tools International, Ltd. The USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted...more

Federal Circuit Rules that PTAB Claim Construction in Inter Partes Interference Proceeding Is Not Binding on District Court in...

Skyhawke Technologies, LLC v. Deca International Corp., Case No. 2016-1325 (Fed. Cir. July 15, 2016) - One recurring question arising from AIA trials and other post-grant proceedings before the PTAB is whether a claim...more

AbbVie v. Amgen: The Litigation Phase for a HUMIRA® Biosimilar Begins

To date, Amgen has been the reference product sponsor for many biosimilar applications. Correspondingly, Amgen has been the Plaintiff in many of the litigations that have been based on the provisions of the Biosimilar Price...more

The 100-Day Program at the ITC

In light of Audio Processing Hardware, it is now clear that, with respect to appeals of ITC 100-day program determinations, Commission determinations against a complainant are immediately appealable, while determinations in...more

Federal Circuit Provides Ammunition to Patentees In Magnum Decision

Patent Owners gained a bit of a reprieve in the Federal Circuit’s recent decision in In Re Magnum Oil Tool Int’l, Ltd., decided on July 25, 2016. In several key respects, Patent Owners regained some footing in the otherwise...more

Lights Out for Invalidity and Unenforceability Counterclaims After PTAB Invalidates Design Patent

Flipping the switch on the last remaining claims in the case, a Massachusetts Court recently dismissed as moot two defendants’ counterclaims for declaratory judgment of invalidity and unenforceability following a PTAB...more

Federal Circuit Rubberstamps 50-Year-Old Practice to Save 10,000 Continuation Patents

Addressing the question of precisely when a continuation application must be filed in order to be entitled to its parent application’s filing date, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the statutory...more

Federal Circuit Review | July 2016

Obvious Combinations Do Not Need to Be Physically Combinable - In Allied Erecting and Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Genesis Attachments, LLC, Appeal No. 2015-1533, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s invalidity finding...more

PTAB Institution Decision Does Not Shift Burden from the Patent Challenger to the Patentee

The Federal Circuit previously clarified that a petitioner’s burden to prove unpatentability never shifts to the patent owner. See Dynamic Drinkware, LLC v. Nat’l Graphics, Inc. On July 25, 2016, the Federal Circuit’s In re...more

PTO Cannot Raise & Decide Unpatentability Theories Never Presented by the Petitioner

In In re Magnum Tools International, Ltd., [2015-1300] (July 25, 2016) the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination that the challenged claims U.S. Patent No. 8,079,413 were invalid for obviousness. The Federal...more

Legal FAQ: Introduction to Patent Litigation

Who enforces a patent? When can a district court patent case be filed? What does the patent holder have to prove to win an infringement suit? Fenwick patent litigators Charlene Morrow and Dargaye Churnet cover these and other...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - July 2016 #2

WBIP, LLC v. Kohler Co. (No. 2015-1038, -1044, 7/19/16) (Moore, O'Malley, Chen) - Moore, J. Affirming denial of JMOL that patent was invalid as obvious and lacked an adequate written description, affirming finding of...more

I Win? No Fair!

In SkyHawke Technologies, LLC v, Deca International Corp., [2016-1325, 2016,1326] (July 15, 2015), the Federal Circuit granted Deca’s motion to dismiss SkyHawke’s appeal of a PTAB Decision in a reexamination on the grounds...more

540 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 22

Follow Intellectual Property Updates on:

JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

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

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.
×