News & Analysis as of

Appeals CAFC

A&O Shearman

Platinum Optics Tech. Inc. v. Viavi Sols. Inc.

A&O Shearman on

In Platinum Optics Tech. Inc. v. Viavi Sols. Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision on the requirements for standing to appeal from an inter partes review (IPR) final...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Beteiro, LLC v. DraftKings, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

Recently, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued an opinion in Beteiro, LLC v. DraftKings Inc.[1]  This case is yet another case where the Federal Circuit upheld invalidity under § 101.  Here, the patents...more

Haug Partners LLP

STUDying Investments Patent-by-Patent: Zircon, Corp. v. International Trade Commission

Haug Partners LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued its most recent precedential decision on satisfying the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement at the International Trade Commission in Zircon...more

Haug Partners LLP

Roku, Inc. v. International Trade Commission – The Power of Words in Patent Assignments

Haug Partners LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued its most recent precedential decision on patent assignments and satisfying the “domestic industry” requirement at the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) in...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2023 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

Not surprisingly, 2023 was another notable year for design rights around the globe. However, nowhere more than the U.S. did we see court decisions that will, in the case of one, and could in the case of another, have...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2023 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends: An Introduction from the Editor

Not surprisingly, 2023 was another notable year for design rights around the globe. However, nowhere more than the U.S. did we see court decisions that will, in the case of one, and could in the case of another, have...more

Jones Day

Another Bite? CAFC Allows Expansion of Arguments in Reply

Jones Day on

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit found no abuse of discretion by the Board when it allowed Apple to expand its analogous art contention in its IPR reply, finding that the Board’s decision did not run afoul of the...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Nothing for Free: Federal Circuit Clarifies Commercial Success is All About Sales

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In affirming final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in two inter partes reviews (IPRs), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that only actual product sales count toward a...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Divided Federal Circuit Makes Controversial Ruling That Nonliteral Elements of “Cloned” Software Are Not Protectable Because It...

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a district court ruling that the asserted nonliteral elements of a software program were not copyright protectable, in part, because allegedly copied materials...more

White & Case LLP

On Remand, US Court of International Trade Again Rejects Transaction-Value Calculation Based on “First Sale” Prices Involving...

White & Case LLP on

A recent (February 9, 2023) US Court of International Trade ("CIT") remand opinion, Meyer Corp., US v. United States, has revived various global supply-chain apprehensions that a previous (August 11, 2022) reversal by the US...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Federal Circuit Gives Win for Patent Owners Seeking to Amend Claims at the PTAB

In American National v. Sleep Number Corporation, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“Board”) decision to allow a patent owner to present proposed amended...more

White & Case LLP

US Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit Vacates US Court of International Trade Decision That Would Have Let Customs Reject...

White & Case LLP on

A recent (August 11, 2022) US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") opinion, Meyer Corp., US v. United States,1 has relieved many concerns that a previous decision by the US Court of International Trade ("CIT")...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Judge Albright Holds Willful Infringement Pleading Does Not Require Allegations of Egregious Infringing Behavior

On July 12, 2022, U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas denied alleged infringer Lenovo’s motion to dismiss ACQIS’s willful and indirect infringement and enhanced damages claims, holding that...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

In Qualcomm v. Apple, Federal Circuit Rules Out Applicant Admitted Prior Art As the “Basis” for Inter Partes Review

On the first of February, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) on two inter partes review (“IPR”)...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Federal Circuit Reaffirms Obviousness Standard by Reversing PTAB in University of Strathclyde v. Clear-Vu Lighting

Earlier this month, in University of Strathclyde v. Clear-Vu Lighting LLC, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) reversed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) that found claims 1-4...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

“What’s In A Name?”: Federal Circuit Holds Claims Court Blurred Distinction Between ‘Size Protests’ And ‘Bid Protests’ In...

Many small businesses learn the hard way that a “bid protest” and a “size protest” differ in much more than name only. Whereas generally a “bid protest” challenges agency action taken in connection with a procurement and can...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - February 2021 #2

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - CHUDIK v. HIRSHFELD [OPINION]  (2020-1833, 2/8/2021) (Taranto, Bryson, Hughes) - Taranto, J.  Affirming PTO decision regarding length of patent term adjustment. The statutory...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Fox Factory v. SRAM – According to CAFC, No Presumption of Nexus for Bicycle Chainring Patents; IPR Decision Reversed and Remanded

On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Fox Factory v. SRAM, Nos. 2018-2024 and 2018-2025, reversed the Board’s Final Written Decision in a pair of inter partes reviews (“IPRs”)...more

International Lawyers Network

Can Design Patents Be Limiting in Enforcement?

Suppose that you have an invention disclosure for a design of an article that you want to protect?  When you review the invention disclosure, you notice that the design is ornamental, for example a pattern, on an article such...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2018

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

Sunstein LLP

Section 101 Gains a Toehold in IPRs

Sunstein LLP on

Inter partes reviews (IPR) are limited by statute to grounds of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 (novelty requirement) and 103 (nonobviousness requirement) and on the basis of prior art patents or printed publications....more

Troutman Pepper

CAFC Affirms PTAB’s Decision To Invalidate Cialis and Adcirca Patents

Troutman Pepper on

In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed decisions in two inter-partes review (IPR) proceedings that patents owned by ICOS Corporation directed to tadalafil formulations (used in the...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

CAFC Rule 36 Judgement: 24 Hour Affirmance with No Explanation

Nothing hurts worse than a Rule 36 (single page, single sentence affirmance of the decision below) after years of work and millions of dollars spent on a case. Rule 36 makes rehearing, en banc review, and/or cert petitions a...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Issues New Standard Operating Procedure Addressing Remands from Federal Circuit: The New Standards and How They May Affect...

On November 16, 2017 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office posted a new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) addressing the conduct of cases remanded from the Federal Circuit to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). New “SOP...more

37 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

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