Administrative Procedure Act Patents

News & Analysis as of

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

Opportunity for Response when Claim Construction Changes

Addressing claim construction and procedural issues during an inter partes review (IPR), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) patentability determination for...more

Genzyme Therapeutic Products Ltd. v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

The Federal Circuit affirmed the decision by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review (IPR) that the claims of Genzyme's U.S Patent Nos. 7,351,410 and 7,655,226 were obvious, in Genzyme Therapeutic...more

PTAB Can Rely Upon Prior Art Not Cited in an IPR Institution Decision to Establish the State of Art

The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s final determination in Genzyme Therapeutic Products Limited Partnership v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical Inc., Nos. 2015-1720, 2015-1721 (Fed. Cir. June 14, 2016), holding that the PTAB did...more

Litigation Alert: Supreme Court Leaves Intact PTAB Authority to Institute and Regulate Inter Partes Review Proceedings

This week in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, the United States Supreme Court decided two important questions related to the power of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) over inter partes review proceedings. First,...more

Federal Circuit Rules That PTAB May Base AIA Trial Decision on Facts Outside Petition for Review

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a decision by the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidating two patents after an inter partes review proceeding, even though the decision...more

Federal Circuit Weighs in on Propriety of New Evidence Adduced During IPR Trial

In Genzyme Therapeutics v. Biomarin Pharma., the Federal Circuit considered what sort of notice and opportunity to be heard in an IPR will satisfy the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA,” 5 U.S.C. § 554(b) & (c)). Genzyme...more

Supreme Court Upholds the PTAB’s Status Quo in Cuozzo

On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, which unanimously upheld the “broadest reasonable construction” claim construction standard (BRI) used by the Patent Trial and...more

Supreme Court Maintains Status Quo on Broadest Reasonable Claim Interpretation Test and Non-Appealability of Institution Decisions

On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, No. 15-4461, an appeal of an institution and cancellation decision in the first-ever petition for inter partes review...more

No Moving Targets: Construing Patent Claims in View of SAS v. ComplementSoft

In its majority opinion rendered June 10, 2016 in SAS Institute, Inc., v. ComplementSoft, LLC, __ F. 3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2016), the Federal Circuit upheld the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s construction of claim terms and...more

Federal Circuit Tosses PTAB Decision

The Federal Circuit vacates a decision by the PTAB for relying on facts raised for the first time at oral argument. Executive Summary - On March 15, 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated...more

PTAB Cannot Rely on Key Factual Assertions First Made at Oral Argument—Patent Owners are Entitled to Notice of and a Fair...

This week the Federal Circuit handed a positive development to Patent Owners working to keep their patent rights before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. In an opinion issued on Tuesday in Dell Inc. v. Acceleron, LLC, Case...more

Overview of Comments on the USPTO's July 2015 Update to the Interim Examination Guidance

In late July, the USPTO issued its July 2015 Update to the 2014 Interim Section 101 Patent Eligibility Guidance (IEG). The July 2015 Update addresses a number of the issues and concerns raised in the public comments to the...more

Special Circumstances Justify USPTO Release of Confidential Information About Pending Patent Applications - Hyatt v. Lee

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) can release confidential information about pending patent applications under special circumstances the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided. Hyatt v. Lee, Case No....more

Patent Term Adjustment of Parent Application Does Not Extend to Continuation Applications - Hossein Mohsenzadeh v. Michelle K. Lee

Addressing for the first time whether a patent term adjustment in a parent application is applicable to continuing applications, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s summary judgment...more

Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Lee (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Earlier this month, in Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Lee, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision by the District Court for the District of Columbia granting summary judgment to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office...more

Federal Circuit Upholds USPTO Post-Wyeth Patent Term Adjustment Procedures

In Daiichi Sankyo Co. v. Lee, the Federal Circuit upheld the USPTO’s post-Wyeth Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) procedures, and found that the USPTO did not abuse its discretion when it limited the Interim Procedures to...more

PTO Refusal to Terminate Ongoing Proceeding Is Not Immediately Reviewable - Automated Merchandising Systems, Inc. v. Lee

Addressing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO’s) refusal to terminate four inter partes reexaminations after a corresponding district court action was terminated, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

PTO Revival Rulings Are Not Subject to Collateral Attacks by Third Parties - Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC v. Lee

Addressing whether third parties have the right to challenge a patent revival ruling by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

No Collateral Challenge of Patent Application Revival

In Exela Pharma Sciences, LLC v. Lee, the Federal Circuit held that the USPTO’s decision to revive a patent application “is not subject to third party collateral challenge” under the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). In so...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

District Court Upholds FTC Hart-Scott-Rodino Rules for Pharmaceutical Patent Transfers

A federal court has upheld the validity of the FTC’s recent rules for reporting certain transfers of exclusive patent rights in the pharmaceutical industry under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements (“HSR”) Act. We...more

District Court Upholds HSR Rulemaking on Pharmaceutical Patent Licensing Transactions

The transfer of certain patent rights in the pharmaceutical industry will remain subject to the premerger notification rules under the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act (HSR Act) after a federal judge rejected a challenge brought by the...more

Patent Watch: Pregis Corp. v. Kappos

[A] third party cannot sue the PTO under the APA to challenge a PTO decision to issue a patent. On December 6, 2012, in Pregis Corp. v. Kappos, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Prost, Clevenger,...more

Kappos v. Hyatt (2012)

That rarest of rara aves issued from the Supreme Court yesterday, an affirmance of a Federal Circuit opinion in Kappos v. Hyatt. Perhaps it is because, as in Stanford v. Roche one of the parties was the government (here,...more

27 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2
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.
×