News & Analysis as of

CAFC

Diagnostic and Personalized Medicine Claims — Strategies for Navigating the §101 Minefield

In Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostic LLC, the Federal Circuit (CAFC) dealt another blow to the patent eligibility of diagnostic methods and the growing field of personalized medicine....more

Senate’s STRONGER Patents Act Aims to Address Key PTAB Patent Owner Woes

by Jones Day on

On June 21, Senators Chris Coons (D-Del), Tom Cotton (R-Ark), Dick Durbin (D-Ill), and Mazie Hironoa (D-Hawaii) introduced the “Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience Patents Act of...more

For Waterproofing Patent, Arguments Against Obviousness Didn’t Hold Water

The Federal Circuit’s decision in Outdry Technologies Corporation, v. Geox S.P.A. discusses some criteria for determining whether or not the explanations provided by the PTAB in an IPR decision are sufficient to support a...more

Supreme Court to Decide the Constitutionality of Inter Partes Review

In a move that could drastically change the patent law landscape, the United States Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC, No. 16-712, to answer the question...more

Earthquake Coming? Supreme Court to Weigh Constitutionality of IPRs (2nd Article)

On June 12, the Supreme Court took certiorari on probably the biggest IPR case possible: a case challenging the constitutionality of IPRs on separation-of-powers and seventh amendment grounds. This comes just a few weeks...more

Matal v. Tam: Trademark Disparagement Clause Held Unconstitutional

by Shearman & Sterling LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court held in an 8–0 decision that the disparagement clause in the Trademark statute—which prohibits the registration of trademarks that may “disparage . . . or bring . . . into contemp[t] or disrepute”...more

Oil States v. Lee Brings Mother of all IPR Cases to Supreme Court

On June 12, the Supreme Court took certiorari on probably the biggest IPR case possible: a case challenging the constitutionality of IPRs on separation-of-powers and seventh amendment grounds. This comes just a few weeks...more

CAFC: What a Person of Skill in the Art “Could” Do is Insufficient Evidence to Support Obviousness Finding

Duke University owns US 7,056,712 (‘712), which claims methods of treating a metabolic disorder known as Pompe disease. In particular, ‘712 claims methods of treating Pompe disease using a recombinant human acid...more

CAFC Finds ANDA Infringement Despite Differences Between FDA Labeling And Claim Language

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a non-precedential decision issued in Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Breckenridge, and...more

AIA On-Sale Bar Applies to Publicized Sales, Even When Knowledge of Sale Did Not Disclose the Underlying Invention

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently construed the on-sale bar provision of 35 U.S.C. 102(a) in a way that will make it easier for petitioners to challenge third party patents. While in an inter-partes...more

Federal Circuit Denies Claim Under SCA Price Adjustment Clause for Pension Withdrawal Liability

by Holland & Knight LLP on

Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a decision of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims upholding and NASA’s denial of a claim in the amount of about $2 million for reimbursement pension...more

Federal Circuit Swats Appeal in View of Patent Owner Failures

In the recent decision in Securus Technologies, Inc. v. Global Tel*Link Corporation, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) addressed a number of issues, a couple of which are worth noting as potential pitfalls...more

Wasica Decision Reinforces Federal Circuit Guidance on Claim Construction

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Wasica Finance v. Continental Automotive Systems touched on a number of well-worn patent issues, but this article focuses on a few key claim construction principles discussed by the...more

Federal Circuit Confirms Judicial Review On PTAB's CBM Institution

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

On April 4, 2017, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) denied Google’s petition for rehearing en banc. Unwired Planet, LLC v. Google Inc., ___ F.3d. ___, Case No. 2015-1812 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 4,...more

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

by Morgan Lewis on

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”?

by Fish & Richardson on

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

by Thompson Coburn LLP on

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

90 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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.