CAFC

News & Analysis as of

Thales : Federal Circuit Forces Acceleration on § 101 for Physics-Based Claims

CAFC Decision: Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, No. 15-5150 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 8, 2017) - Decision: In Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, No. 15-5150 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 8, 2017), the Federal Circuit reversed a...more

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB’s Holding of Anticipation Despite an Element Missing from the Prior Art

On March 14, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarified, in a precedential opinion, that an anticipating reference must supply all of the claim elements, regardless of what a person of skill in...more

Section 101 Gaining Momentum: Applying Physics to Uncommon Inertial Sensor Configuration Is Not an Abstract Idea

In Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, No. 15-5150 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 8, 2017), the Federal Circuit reversed a decision of the Court of Federal Claims that found claims drawn to an inertial tracking system patent-ineligible...more

Improved Computer Functionality Argument Fails 101 Eligibility Test in Evolutionary Intelligence

Not all abstract ideas fall under the scrutiny of 35 USC 101. Over the past year, the CAFC has chipped away at the granite façade that is 35 USC 101 issuing several opinions finding abstract ideas to be patent eligible under...more

Highest Patent Court Narrows Scope of Covered Business Review

A patent does not qualify for “covered business method” review if its claims are only incidental to a financial activity. The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently decided that a claimed method (in...more

USPTO Claim Construction Standards for Inter Partes Review Proceedings

Confirming long-standing U.S. Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO) practice, the Supreme Court in the Cuozzo Speed Techs. v. Lee decision (Cuozzo), affirmed the USPTO’s broadest reasonable interpretation standard as the...more

USPTO Standards of Review for Inter Partes Review Proceedings

The Administrative Procedures Act (APA) applies to Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings, and the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) is using the APA to check the PTAB’s tendency to invalidate claims....more

What Patents Can Be Challenged in the Patent Office as “Covered Business Methods”?

Perhaps your firm is a bank or insurer has been sued for infringing a “business method” patent. Or your firm owns such a patent, and must decide whether to sue a competitor for infringing it. Or your company is simply...more

Stating Problems that the Claimed Invention is Trying to Solve Appears helpful to Vindicate Patent Eligibility

In Trading Technologies International, Inc. v. CQG, Inc. et al., [2016-1616] (January 18, 2017), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the district court’s holding of patent eligibility with regard to...more

Can You Be Reasonably Certain a Water Balloon Is Substantially Filled? Indefiniteness in Tinnus v. Telebrands

In Tinnus Enterprises, LLV v. Telebrands Enterprises (Fed. Cir. 2016-1410), the CAFC considered whether a claim requiring that a container (think water balloon) be “substantially filled” was indefinite under 35 USC §112....more

[Webinar] Past Performance Primer - March 2nd, 12:00pm Central Time

In selecting winning vendors, federal, state and local governments have typically looked at past contract performance information as part of their overall evaluation processes. Vendors that have a history of performing well...more

PTAB allows Patent Owner to File Supplement to Motion to Amend in Veeam Software Corporation v. Veritas Technologies LLC

On remand from the Federal Circuit the PTAB granted authorization for a patent owner to file a supplement to its Motion to Amend in Veeam Software Corporation v. Veritas Technologies LLC, IPR2014-00090, Paper 42 (P.T.A.B....more

CAFC Upholds Preliminary Injunction Despite Unpatentability Ruling of PTAB

This week in Tinnus Enterprises LLC v. Telebrands Corp. (Moore, Wallach and Stoll), the Federal Circuit upheld the grant of a preliminary injunction by the Eastern District of Texas, despite a PTAB Final Written Decision...more

Eli Lilly v. Teva – Expert Testimony and the Indefiniteness Inquiry

In the patent world, claim scope depends on the meaning given to the individual words in the claim. If the meaning of a word in the claim is not clear, the claim may be attacked as invalid under the indefiniteness standard....more

Suing The United States Government For Patent Infringement And Defending Against A Claim Of Obviousness

A patentee may bring patent infringement claims against the United States government pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1498, in which Congress waived the sovereign immunity of the United States against such claims. Patent infringement...more

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Claim Interpretation in Dispute over Credit Card Security Patent

The Federal Circuit reversed the invalidation of two patents directed to providing security for credit card purchases in an opinion released earlier today. The patents at issue, U.S. Patent Nos. 7,840,486 and 8,036,988,...more

CAFC: Improper Assignment Voids Trademark Registration

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit underscored the importance of being mindful of the prohibition against assigning intent-to-use applications and of carefully constructing agreements for future assignment of...more

PTAB Reversed on Issue of Diligent Reduction to Practice

Perfect Surgical Techniques (PST), Inc. owns US 6,030,384 (‘384). Olympus petitioned for Inter Partes review of ‘384 as anticipated or obvious over JP H10-33551 (JP ‘551). JP ‘551 published less than one year before the...more

Does Yeda v. Abbott Clarify Inherent Disclosure Under 35 USC 112

Recently, in Yeda Research and Development v Abbott GMBH & Co. KG, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) weighed in on the issue of inherent disclosure as a means for satisfying the written description...more

Another Friendly Reminder from the CAFC – Use of “the Present Invention” is Clear and Unequivocal Evidence of Disavowal

Disavowal can occur when a patent holder disavows the full scope of claim terms in the specification or during prosecution (e.g., through the doctrine of prosecution history estoppel). In either event, disavowal requires...more

Pleading Standard Defined– CAFC Holds that Joint Infringement Complaint Requires Identification of All Required Claim Steps

Plaintiffs bringing patent infringement complaints under the Iqbal/Twombly pleading standard should take notice. On September 30, 2016, a panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a deficient...more

CAFC’s Husky Decision Makes Sledding Tougher for Patent Owners in PTAB Appeals

The Federal Circuit recently determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that assignor estoppel has no affect in an inter partes review (“IPR”). The majority’s decision...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies That It Still Lacks Jurisdiction To Review Whether Petition Was Time-Barred

A “determination by the Director whether to institute an inter partes review under this section shall be final and nonappealable.” 35 U.S.C. § 314(d). A series of decisions from the Federal Circuit have clarified to what...more

ITC Declines to File Petition for Certiorari – CAFC Holding that ITC Does Not Have Jurisdiction over Digital Imports Stands

The deadline has come and gone for the ITC and patentee Align to file petitions for certiorari seeking review by the Supreme Court of the Federal Circuit’s decision in ClearCorrect. On November 10, 2015, a panel of the...more

Magnum Offers New Path for Challenging AIA Decisions: Burden of Production

On July 25, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) held in In re Magnum Oil Tools International (Newman, O’Malley & Chen) that the burden of production to show unobviousness does not shift to a patent owner...more

77 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
Cybersecurity

"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.
×