News & Analysis as of

Claim Construction

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Test for Exception to Increasingly Rare Interference Proceedings

Speck v. Bates, No. 2023-1147 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2024) addressed two issues, (1) whether courts should apply a one-way test or a two-way test to determine if pre-critical claims materially differ from post-critical claims,...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Focuses on POV Camera Technology in Latest Patent Eligibility Opinion

Holland & Knight LLP on

In Contour IP Holding LLC v. GoPro, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment in which the asserted patents were directed to an abstract idea and, thus, patent-ineligible....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2024)

In a joint appeal of two adverse decisions from the District Court, the Federal Circuit on procedural grounds rejected an appeal from the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation ("WARF") in Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Expert Need Not Have Acquired the Requisite Skill Level Prior to the Time of the Invention

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more

Goodwin

Issue 45: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

In Pfizer Inc., v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., SK Chems Co. Ltd., v. Vidal, 2019-1871 (March 5, 2024), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s conclusions that claims 1–45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 were unpatentable due to...more

Jones Day

PTAB Claim Construction May Be Binding In Later Litigation

Jones Day on

In 2016, the Federal Circuit expressed doubt that claim constructions from the PTAB could give rise to estoppel in later litigation because “the [PTAB] applies the broadest reasonable construction of the claims while the...more

BakerHostetler

Patent Experts: No Ordinary Skill in the Art at the Time of Invention? No Problem!

BakerHostetler on

The hypothetical person with ordinary skill in the art will have a certain amount of requisite experience in the subject matter of the patent at the time of the invention of the patent....more

Goodwin

Del. Judge Connolly Says Preambles Are Limiting, Cites Alice in Wonderland, and Invites the Federal Circuit to Weigh In

Goodwin on

Back in May 2023, Alnylam brought suit against Pfizer and BioNTech in the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of patents directed to vaccine lipid nanoparticle technology. On August 12, 2024, Chief Judge Connolly...more

Jones Day

No Requirement to Raise All Arguments in Rehearing Request

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit in Voice Tech Corp. v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 2022-2163 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2024) (Lourie, Chen, and Cunningham), affirmed the PTAB’s determination that claims of Voice Tech Corp.’s (“Voice Tech”) U.S....more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up: July 2024

Fish & Richardson on

Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Not Just a Blip: Section 101 as Affirmative Defense

McDermott Will & Emery on

On appeal from a motion to dismiss based on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a district court appropriately analyzed certain claims as representative claims and that the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Waiver Regulations for Rehearings Before the PTAB

In Voice Tech Corp., v. Unified Patents, LLC 2022-2163 (Fed Cir. August 1, 2024), the case addresses whether failure to re-raise arguments in a request for rehearing before the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) forfeits...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Federal Circuit Clarifies the Meaning of “Publicly Disclosed”

This decision emphasizes the significance of broader public dissemination to meet the statutory requirement of “publicly disclosed” for purposes of exceptions to prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(B)....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Unified Front: No Forfeiture by Failing to Raise Argument in Request for Rehearing

Addressing forfeiture of issues on appeal and sufficiency of the asserted prior art, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness finding, explaining that a party does not...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2024

Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technology International Limited Inc., Appeal No. 2023-1336 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit held that the private but non-confidential sale of thousands of...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | July 2024

Knobbe Martens on

In Natera, Inc v. Neogenomics Laboratories, Inc., Appeal No. 24-1324 the Federal Circuit held that  preliminary injunction may be valid if a substantial question of invalidity was not raised, even if the asserted patent is...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Don’t Mess With Anna: Texas Town Schools Patent Owner on § 101

On cross-appeals from a granted Fed. R. of Civ. Pro. 12(c) motion on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent directed to a method for “assist[ing] an investigator in...more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTAB MTA Pilot Program to the Rescue

On review of a final written decision from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board in an inter partes review (IPR), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that all challenged claims were obvious but left open the...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2024 #4

Zyxel Comms. Corp. v. UNM Rainforest Innovations, Appeal Nos. 2022-2220, -2250 (Fed. Cir. July 22, 2024) Our Case of the Week provided new guidance on amendment proceedings under the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s 2019...more

McDermott Will & Emery

House Rules: Remote Gambling Activity Claims Go Bust

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit applied the Alice/Mayo framework to assess whether claims directed to remote gambling were patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and determined that the claims were directed to...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Preliminary Injunction Halts Sales of Tumor-Informed Cancer Screening Test

Late last week in Natera, Inc. v. NeoGenomics Laboratories, Inc. (24-1324), the Federal Circuit affirmed a preliminary injunction ruling from the lower court that mostly prohibits NeoGenomics from selling its oncology test...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Federal Circuit Interprets the Application of 35 USC § 285 and Attorney’s Fees

In Dragon Intellectual Property LLC v. Dish Network L.L.C. No. 22-1621 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2024), the Federal Circuit clarifies the standard for “exceptional” cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The case concerns attorneys’ fees and...more

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Federal Circuit Rules on Patent Damages Based on Foreign Conduct

AEON Law on

The Federal Circuit has ruled that a US patent-holder plaintiff may be able to recover damages for a defendant’s foreign sales of infringing products if the foreign sales were proximately caused by the defendant’s improperly...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Judge Alan D. Albright Authors First Federal Circuit Opinion

Fenwick & West LLP on

Judge Alan D. Albright, sitting by designation at the Federal Circuit, penned his inaugural appellate decision in Apple v. Omni MedSci on Friday. The unanimous ruling favored Apple, who contested Omni MedSci’s patent via...more

McDermott Will & Emery

New Arguments Yield Same Unpatentability Outcome

McDermott Will & Emery on

On remand from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in connection with inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board considered the petitioner’s reply arguments and evidence regarding the...more

1,710 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 69

"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