Prior Art

News & Analysis as of

Patent Owner Must Prove Patentability of Proposed Amended Claims (Including Prior Art Date)

Neste Oil Oyj v. REG Synthetic Fuels, LLC - In an order addressing a motion for a sur-reply to introduce evidence to antedate a prior art reference in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the U.S. Patent and...more

Seeing Beyond the Doggie Wear: What MCR Innovations Teaches about the Obviousness of Design Patents in the Garment Industry

In the United States, patent protection can be afforded to aesthetic innovation (design patents), and functional innovation (utility patents). Because binding precedent relating to design patents is relatively sparse,...more

The Art of Prior Art Searching

Prior to filing a patent application at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), an applicant seeking patent protection for an invention should consider conducting a prior art search. Also known as a...more

The USPTO Is Off-Key With International Patent Law Harmonization

As a leader in science, technology and innovation, the United States long has played a central role in global intellectual property matters. As the world’s largest economy, the United States has played a central role in trade...more

PTAB Adopts Broad View of Inherency Doctrine

Ariosa Diagnostics v. Isis Innovation Ltd. - Addressing a variety of issues in a recent inter partes review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) determined that...more

Prior Art Redefined Under the AIA

The America Invents Act’s (“AIA’s”) overhaul of the U.S. Patent law system has significantly redefined what constitutes available prior art that can be used to reject patent applications or invalidate patents. Thanks to the...more

In denying attorney’s fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, Judge Buchwald reviews post-Octane decisions.

Dr. Paula Small v. Implant Direct MFG. LLC d/b/a Implant Direct, LLC - Case Number: 1:06-cv-00683-NRB - In 2013, defendants won summary judgment on two dental implant patents. One patent was found invalid...more

Copyright Notice on Prior Art Establishes Priority Date in IPR

The PTAB weighed in on whether a copyright notice can be sufficient to demonstrate the priority date of a printed publication in FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Leak Surveys, Inc., IPR2014-00411, -434, -608, and -609. In Flir,...more

USPTO Explores Crowdsourcing Prior Art

In a Federal Register Notice dated November 12, 2014, the USPTO solicited public comments on the “use of crowdsourcing to identify relevant prior art,” and announced a related roundtable to be held on December 2, 2014 at the...more

PTAB Rejects End-Around the IPR Printed Publication Requirement

Post Grant Review provides a breath of fresh air to Patent Office patentability challenge procedures by allowing prior sales and prior uses as eligible prior art. But, of course, PGR is only available for post-AIA patents and...more

Design Patent Case Digest: Wallace v. Ideavillage Products Corp.

Decision Date: September 15, 2014 - Court: District of New Jersey - Patents: D485,990 - Holding: Defendant’s motion for summary judgment: GRANTED - Opinion: Allyson Wallace, initially acting pro se,...more

“Soda-Pop” Bottle Caps Can Be Analogous Art for Flash Chromatography Cartridges

Scientific Plastic Products, Inc. v. Biotage AB - Addressing the issue of analogous art in the context of inter partes reexamination, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision of the U.S....more

PTAB Cracking Down on Serial IPR Petitions

November 4, 2014 — The estoppels of 35 U.S.C. §315(e)(1) don’t kick in to bar a petitioner from filing a second inter partes review petition against the same patent until a final written decision is rendered in the first....more

“Why, I declare” … Proper Use of Evidentiary Declarations under New (Post-AIA) Rule 37 C.F.R. 1.130

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) was signed into law on September 16, 2011. While the AIA alters U.S. patent practice in several ways, perhaps the most significant change brought about by the law is the switch from a...more

PTAB on Analogous Art

Schott Gemtron Corp. v. SSW Holding Co., Inc. - In a final written decision addressing the patentability of claims challenged as obvious, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB, the...more

Federal Circuit Review | October 2014

Inequitable Conduct Ruling Upheld - In AMERICAN CALCAR, INC. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., Appeal No. 2013-1061, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of inequitable conduct. Calcar asserted patents related to...more

PTAB Addresses Issue of Whether IPR Prior Art is Enabling

A “Hail Mary” of sorts, for Patent Owners, in their fight to defend the patentability of a challenged patent, can be an argument that a particular prior art reference is not relevant to the patentability analysis because it...more

Demystifying Patent Terminology: Five Easily Misunderstood Words and Phrases

To those who dabble in patent law only occasionally, doing so can feel as disorienting as walking into a wild jungle. And with good reason—patent law’s unique terminology makes it ripe with opportunities for miscommunication...more

Movants Face a High Bar to Succeed on Motions to Amend

Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge Ltd. - In response to a patent owner’s motion to amend its claims in an inter partes review (IPR) petition, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Patent...more

PTAB Disqualifies Art as Being Non-Analogous to Claimed Invention

A limited number of cases, to date, have dealt with the issue of analogous prior art in an obviousness analysis. In Schott Gemtron Corp. v. SSW Holding Co., IPR2014-00358, the Board addressed this type of issue, finding in...more

Don’t Try to Barnstorm Proof of Printed Publication

The PTAB recently denied institution of inter partes review based on a petitioner’s failure to prove that a document was indeed a printed publication qualifying as prior art to the patent at issue. ...more

PTAB Denies Petition for Inter Partes Review When Ongoing Proceedings Raise Substantially Similar Arguments

In July 2013, Cardiocom filed a petition for IPR of a patent. Petitioner Medtronic then acquired Cardiocom. In January 2014, the Board decided to move forward on eight claims and declared trial on two obviousness grounds,...more

PTAB Denies Follow-On Petition for Inter Partes Review Including Prior Art and Arguments Raised in Earlier Petition by Same...

Petitioner Unilever filed an earlier petition for IPR of 33 claims of a patent. In the Decision on Institution, the Board denied review of 11 claims and granted review of the rest. Unilever then filed a second petition for...more

PTAB Declines to Institute Follow-On Petition for Inter Partes Review Based on "New" Reference

In January 2013, Petitioner IBS filed a petition for IPR. Five months later, IBS filed a second petition for IPR on the same patent claims. The follow-on petition relied on art from the first petition and other prior art,...more

PTAB Denies Follow-On Petition for Inter Partes Review Including Prior Art and Arguments Raised in Earlier Petitions by Different...

Petitioner Unified filed a petition for IPR of 11 claims of a patent. Unified acknowledged that the patent was already subject to three other petitions for IPR and that the Board had instituted trial on two of those three...more

187 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 8