Claim Construction

News & Analysis as of

The Importance of the Specification in Alice Challenges

It is axiomatic that the claims of a patent describe the invention, and for Alice challenges, define whether an invention is drawn to an abstract idea without an inventive concept. Of course, claims are construed in light of...more

Intellectual Property Newsletter -August 2016

Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its quarterly newsletter. The newsletter covers a number of current IP topics, including a look at the America Invents Act, five years in; the U.S. International Trade...more

Construing Markush Group Claims

In Multilayer Stretch Cling Film v. Berry Plastics, the Federal Circuit provided a detailed discussion of the construction of claims that use Markush group language. The decision emphasizes the closed nature of the...more

Netsirv v. Boxbee, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

A post grant review (PGR) is an administrative reconsideration of a recent-granted U.S. patent. The proceeding is held in the USPTO, before that body's Patent Trial and Appeal Board. A petition for PGR is timely if it is...more

BRI Does Not Apply if Patent Expires Any Time During Reexamination Proceeding

In In Re CSB-System International, Inc., [2015-1832] (August 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB erred in applying a broadest reasonable interpretation claim construction, instead of a Phillips claim...more

The Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard Does Not Apply in a Reexamination Proceeding When a Patent Expires During the...

On August 9, 2016, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in In re: CSB-System International, Inc., No. 2015-1832. The issue before the Federal Circuit was whether the Patent Trial and...more

Federal Circuit Rules that PTAB Claim Construction in Inter Partes Interference Proceeding Is Not Binding on District Court in...

Skyhawke Technologies, LLC v. Deca International Corp., Case No. 2016-1325 (Fed. Cir. July 15, 2016) - One recurring question arising from AIA trials and other post-grant proceedings before the PTAB is whether a claim...more

BPCIA Litigation Updates: Amgen v. Apotex, Immunex v. Sandoz, Janssen v. Celltrion

A few BPCIA litigation updates to wrap up the week for our readers, looking ahead to next week: ..The Federal Circuit issued its formal mandate in Amgen v. Apotex yesterday. With the issuance of the formal mandate, the...more

Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Polar Electro Oy (Fed. Cir. 2016); Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Garmin Int'l., Inc. (Fed. Cir....

In parallel decisions regarding litigation over the same patent, the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court decision that the claims were invalid for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). This decision, expressly...more

Patent Drafters: Leaving Coining to the Mint

In Advanced Ground Information Systems, Inc. v. Life360, Inc., [2015-1732] (July 28, 2016) the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,031,728 and 7,672,681 for indefiniteness....more

Repeated and Consistent Usage, including in Rule 131 Declaration, Defines Term

In GPNE Corp. v. Apple Inc., [2015-1825] (August 1, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s determination of noninfringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,570,954 and 7,792,492, relating to a two-way paging system....more

Opportunity for Response when Claim Construction Changes

Addressing claim construction and procedural issues during an inter partes review (IPR), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) patentability determination for...more

Genzyme Therapeutic Products Ltd. v. Biomarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

The Federal Circuit affirmed the decision by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review (IPR) that the claims of Genzyme's U.S Patent Nos. 7,351,410 and 7,655,226 were obvious, in Genzyme Therapeutic...more

Claim Terms with No Specialized Meaning in the Art Always Linked to Specification

Emphasizing the public-notice function of a patent’s specification, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s construction of four patent claim terms based entirely on intrinsic evidence....more

Federal Circuit Review | July 2016

Obvious Combinations Do Not Need to Be Physically Combinable - In Allied Erecting and Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Genesis Attachments, LLC, Appeal No. 2015-1533, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s invalidity finding...more

Federal Circuit Holds Claims to Cell Freezing Methods to Be Patent-Eligible

On July 5, 2016, the Federal Circuit held that claims reciting methods for cryopreserving hepatocytes in U.S. Patent No. 7,604,929 ("the '929 patent") are eligible for patenting. The decision vacated a lower court's holding...more

LED Dispute Blazes Through Summary Judgment

A recent decision from Judge Stearns sheds new light on a dispute between Lexington Luminance (“Lexington”) and Google over LED technology. The dispute began in November, 2012, when Lexington accused Google of infringing...more

Software Inventions See More Help in Bascom Decision

Since the Supreme Court decided Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, patent examiners and the courts have been working to better define patent eligibility. Following closely on the heels of their Enfish, LLC, v. Microsoft...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - July 2016 #2

WBIP, LLC v. Kohler Co. (No. 2015-1038, -1044, 7/19/16) (Moore, O'Malley, Chen) - Moore, J. Affirming denial of JMOL that patent was invalid as obvious and lacked an adequate written description, affirming finding of...more

Packing Your Patent Application for Europe: Avoiding Problems Under European Patent Law

Planning an extended European vacation for your patent application? A lengthy stay in Munich with possible outings to The Hague, Berlin, Vienna, or Brussels? While your patent application won’t be strolling through the...more

I Win? No Fair!

In SkyHawke Technologies, LLC v, Deca International Corp., [2016-1325, 2016,1326] (July 15, 2015), the Federal Circuit granted Deca’s motion to dismiss SkyHawke’s appeal of a PTAB Decision in a reexamination on the grounds...more

Claims Are Construed In Estradiol Case

Stark, C. J. Claim construction opinion issues regarding one term from one patent. A Markman hearing took place on May 3, 2016. Defendants presented the testimony of an expert at the hearing, and plaintiff cross-examined....more

Binding Claim Construction Rulings Pre- Teva Vs. Post -Teva

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that clear error review applies to factual determinations underlying district court claim constructions. There has been much discussion about the...more

The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016) (en banc)

The past decade or so of U.S. patent law has been characterized by a consistent theme between Federal Circuit decisions and the Supreme Court's invalidation of them (and sometimes can be discerned even in those rare instances...more

Status Quo At The PTAB For Now: Supreme Court Makes No Changes to IPR Practice

Recently, the Supreme Court declined to make any changes to IPR procedure in its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, 579 U.S. ___ (2016). Relying primarily on statutory language and concepts of agency rulemaking...more

718 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 29
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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.
×