Reissue Patents Patents

News & Analysis as of

When a Divisional Is Not a Divisional: No Section 121 Safe Harbor for Reissue Patentee Who Retroactively Omitted New Matter - G.D....

Addressing the “safe harbor” provision under 35 U.S.C. § 121, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court ruling that a reissue patent was invalid for obviousness-type double patenting. G.D....more

Federal Circuit Strikes Final Blow to Celebrex Patent

In 2008, the Federal Circuit determined that claims 1-4 and 11-17 of U.S. Patent No. 5,760,068 were invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP) over a related parent patent, in part because the ‘068 patent was filed...more

Dependent Claims Give Rise to Improper Broadening Reissue

In ArcelorMittal France v. AK Steel Corp., the Federal Circuit found that the addition of a dependent claim to a reissue application improperly broadened the scope of the original independent claims beyond the two-year period...more

Spineology Sues Wright Medical Technology

Spineology, Inc. sued Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (Wright Medical) in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota . Spineology’s complaint alleges that Wright Medical’s X-REAM percutaneous expandable...more

Orange Book Patent Listing and Patent Certifications: Key Provisions in FDA’s Proposed Regulations Implementing the Medicare...

On February 6, 2015, the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued long-awaited proposed regulations to implement portions of the Medicare Modernization Act of 2003 (MMA). Consisting of almost one hundred pages...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

Even Geniuses Commit Error—Sufficient to Support Reissue - Fleming v. Escort, Inc.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that an error in drafting original claims that failed to capture the full scope of the invention, even where the error stemmed from the inventor’s perspective as a...more

Federal Circuit Finds "Classic" Reissue Error

In Fleming v. Escort Inc., the Federal Circuit noted that the error on which Fleming’s reissue patents were based was a “classic” type of error justifying reissue: the inventor’s failure to appreciate the full scope of his...more

Reissue Patents Must Be Drawn to the Same Invention as the Original Patent

Antares Pharma, Inc. v. Medac Pharma Inc. - Addressing the original-patent requirement, tracing vintage Supreme Court cases and interpreting the statutory purpose of 35 U.S.C. § 251, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more

Federal Circuit Reinvigorates “Original Patent” Requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 251 For Reissue Patents

On November 17, 2014, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Antares Pharma, Inc. v. medac Pharma Inc. and medac GmbH, ruled in favor of Ropes & Gray client Medac and breathed new life into the “original patent”...more

Voluntary and Intentional Applicant Choices are Errors Under the Reissue Statute Only if They Arise from a False or Deficient...

In re Dinsmore - Addressing the issue of whether the filing of a terminal disclaimer that rendered a patent unenforceable by the applicants was an error for the purposes of the reissue statute, the U.S. Court of...more

Federal Circuit Says Mistaken Belief Required for Reissue Error

In In re Dinsmore, the Federal Circuit held that the reissue process could not be used to correct an alleged defect in a terminal disclaimer between patents that were not commonly owned, because there had been no “mistaken...more

In re Dinsmore (Fed. Cir. 2014) - Court Upholds PTO Determination That Reissue Cannot Cure Improper Terminal Disclaimer

Despite thirty years of efforts by the Federal Circuit to bring consistency and transparency to patent law (and the last dozen years of the Supreme Court's efforts to the contrary), in many respects patent law remains "full...more

Intellectual Property Newsletter - January 2013

In This Issue: *News From the Bench - Enough Already, Supreme Court Tells Petitioner in Mythology-Laced Opinion. - Divided Fed. Circuit Affirms Patentability of Claims to a 12-Can Dispenser...more

Intellectual Property Newsletter - December 2012

In This Issue: ..News From the Bench: - Clarification of the “Vitiation Test” when applying the Doctrine of Equivalents. - The “Success More Likely Than Not” and “Ordinary Observer” Standards for a...more

IP Update, Vol. 15, No. 12, December 2012

In This Issue: Patents - ..Federal Circuit Rules It’s Own Standards Apply When Considering Preliminary Injunctions ..Preliminary Testing of Medical Devices in Animals Enables Their Use in...more

Patent Watch: Intel Corp. v. Negotiated Data Solutions, LLC

§ 251 suggests to a potential licensee that -- in the absence of contrary language in the licensing agreement -- a license under the patent that is not directed to any specific claims, field of use or other limited right will...more

Patent Watch: In re Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litig.

"The law does not require that no competent attorney or alert inventor could have avoided the error sought to be corrected by reissue." On December 14, 2012, in In re Rosuvastatin Calcium Patent Litig., the U.S. Court of...more

18 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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*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.