Intellectual Property Science, Computers & Technology Administrative Agency

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

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

Shortridge v. Foundation Construction Payroll Service, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Douglas M. Shortridge, the named inventor of U.S. Patent No. 8,744,933, sued Foundation Construction Payroll Service, LLC ("Foundation") for infringement thereof in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of...more

Can FDA Implement The BPCIA As The CAFC Suggested?

In Amgen v. Apotex, the Federal Circuit held that under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”), “an applicant must provide a reference product sponsor with 180 days’ post-licensure notice before...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

HP Inc. v. Big Baboon, Inc. (PTAB 2016) - Business Method Patent Not Invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101

HP Inc. and SAP America, Inc. filed a Petition seeking a covered business method (CBM) patent review of claims 15 and 20–34 of U.S. Patent No. 6,343,275 owned by Big Baboon, Inc. The PTAB, however, determined that the...more

Revenge of the Present Invention

Patentees suing alleged infringers have learned from a long history of federal district court and Federal Circuit rulings that (paraphrasing the Miranda warning given to criminal suspects) “anything you say [in the patent or...more

USPTO Implements Pilot Program to Support President's National Cancer Moonshot

Last month, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published a notice in the Federal Register (81 Fed. Reg. 42328) regarding the implementation of a new pilot program that will provide for earlier review of patent applications...more

Packing Your Patent Application for Europe: Avoiding Problems Under European Patent Law

Planning an extended European vacation for your patent application? A lengthy stay in Munich with possible outings to The Hague, Berlin, Vienna, or Brussels? While your patent application won’t be strolling through the...more

Patent Office Institutes Post-Prosecution Patent Program

The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s new pilot program provides patent applicants with a valuable tool to efficiently and inexpensively advance prosecution after a final office action. The Patent Office...more

USPTO Releases Memorandum on Subject Matter Eligibility

On May 4th the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued its latest Guidance on how Examiners are to apply recent U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedent related to subject matter eligibility (see "USPTO Issues Update...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

USPTO Patent Eligibility Guidance In View Of CellzDirect And Sequenom

On July 14, 2016, the USPTO issued a Memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps on patent eligibility in view of recent court decisions. The July 2016 Memorandum extracts more guidance for assessing patent eligibility from the...more

Teaming Up to Cure Cancer "Patents 4 Patients" – Fast Track Review

The United States Patent and Trademark Office “USPTO” is launching the “Patents 4 Patients” initiative, which will provide an accelerated review for methods of cancer treatments. Effective on June 29, 2016 the new “Cancer...more

New After-Final Pilot Prosecution Program Allows Enhanced Patent Practice

Effective July 12, 2016, the PTO is initiating a Post-Prosecution Pilot Program (P3) to test its impact on enhancing patent practice during the period subsequent to a final rejection and prior to the filing of a notice of...more

New USPTO P3 Program Offers Applicant Participation In After Final Conference

The USPTO has launched a new after final program available starting July 11, 2016. The Post-Prosecution Pilot Program (P3) combines features of the After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0 (AFCP 2.0) and Pre-Appeal Brief...more

It Ain’t Over ‘Till It’s Over

It seems that the majority of patent applications, including those that eventually issue as patents, face a “final” rejection at some point. “Final” does not not always mean final, however, and there are at least eight...more

IPR Tracker: IPR2016-00408 & IPR2016-00409 (U.S. Patent No. 8,889,135) (Boehringer Ingelheim Int’l GMBH) – IPRs Instituted

The Board has instituted IPR2016-00408 and IPR2016-00409 on AbbVie Biotechnology’s U.S. Patent No. 8,889,135, which covers methods of treating rheumatoid arthritis with a human anti-tumor necrosis factor a antibody. This...more

IPR Tracker: IPR2016-01373 (U.S. Patent No. 6,331,415) (Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.) (Cabilly II Patent) – Petition for IPR

Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. has filed an IPR petition on U.S. Patent No. 6,331,415. This patent has been challenged several times over the past year with mixed results: IPR2015-01624 (instituted); IPR2016-00383 (not...more

Status Quo At The PTAB For Now: Supreme Court Makes No Changes to IPR Practice

Recently, the Supreme Court declined to make any changes to IPR procedure in its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, 579 U.S. ___ (2016). Relying primarily on statutory language and concepts of agency rulemaking...more

Federal Circuit Offers Path Through Section 101 Thicket for Biotech Method Patents

In its July 5, 2016 decision in Rapid Litigation Management Ltd and In Vitro, Inc. v. CellzDirect, Inc. and Invitrogen Corp., the Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to an improved method of cryopreserving...more

Intellectual Property Law - July 2016

Supreme Court: Status Quo in Cuozzo - Why it matters: On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, where it rejected challenges to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes...more

And in the Alternative . . .

The older among us have “unlearned” the prohibition of the word “or” in patent claims, and have reasoned that if “or” is acceptable, its cousin “and/or” is acceptable in patent claims as well. A few years ago, the USPTO...more

PTAB Grants Late Motion to Amend, But Amended Claims Fail to Breathe Life into Patent

Addressing the standards for a motion to amend claims during an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) granted a motion to amend the claims in an IPR, but ultimately denied...more

Supreme Court Decides Two Key Aspects of IPR in Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2016 in Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee that: (1) the statutory authority of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in instituting an inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding is...more

634 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 26

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.
×