CAFC

News & Analysis as of

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

En Banc CAFC Requires UCC Sale For On Sale Bar

In an en banc decision issued in The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit determined that in order for a commercial transaction to trigger the on-sale bar of § 35 USC 102(b), it must “bear the general...more

Can FDA Implement The BPCIA As The CAFC Suggested?

In Amgen v. Apotex, the Federal Circuit held that under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (“BPCIA”), “an applicant must provide a reference product sponsor with 180 days’ post-licensure notice before...more

CAFC Finds Cryopreservation Method Patent Eligible

The Federal Circuit ruled that the cryopreservation methods at issue in Rapid Litigation Mgmt. Ltd. v. CellzDirect Inc., are patent eligible under 35 USC § 101. It therefore vacated and remanded the decision of the U.S....more

Breaking News: CAFC Affirms in Amgen v. Apotex

The Federal Circuit issued its decision in Amgen v. Apotex (re: Apotex’s Neulasta biosimilar) this morning. The Court affirmed the district court, holding that the commercial-marketing provision in 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(8)(A)...more

Resurfacing of Preemption for Patent-Eligibility of Software Inventions – The Bascom Decision

Harness the Lesson - It seems the preemption argument in favor of patent-eligibility has resurfaced as an argument for patent-eligibility of claims directed to software-related subject matter if the claimed invention does...more

CAFC Hands Down Significant § 101 Decision in Bascom Global Internet

In Bascom Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Bascom Global sued for infringement of US Patent No. 5,987,606, titled “Method And System For Content Filtering Information Retrieved From An Internet Computer Network,”...more

CAFC Upholds Same Day Continuation Applications

The Federal Circuit decided not to disturb the “longstanding administrative construction” of 35 USC § 120 that permits the filing of a continuation application on the same day its parent application grants as a patent. The...more

USPTO Releases Update on Patent Eligibility Decision in Light of Enfish

On May 19, the USPTO released an update to patent examiners regarding the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC) recent decision in Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp. and TLI Communications LLC v. A.V. Automotive,...more

Enfish and TLI: A Study of the CAFC’s Recent Section 101 Opinions

Like a ray of light at the end of a long dark tunnel, the Federal Circuit’s recent reversal of a determination of patent ineligibility in Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2016) (Hughes, J.)...more

68 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Popular Topics

"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.
×