News & Analysis as of

Evidence Appeals Patents

McDermott Will & Emery

Is Evidence of All Claimed Elements in Prior Art Enough? Not Without Motivation to Combine

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness decision, finding that disclosure in the prior art of all recited claim elements across multiple references, without more,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Ordinary Meaning: “Identifying” Doesn’t Mean Detecting; It Means Identifying

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s decisions finding one set of challenged claims patentable and another set of challenged claims in the same patent unpatentable. The...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Intertwining Nature of Motivation to Combine and Reasonable Expectation of Success

In Elekta Limited v. Zap Surgical Systems, Inc., No. 21-1985 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 21, 2023), the case addresses the interplay between findings related to motivation to combine and reasonable expectation of success in determining...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Ruling of Obviousness for the Colorization of Fabrics

In Jodi A. Schwendimann, fka Jodi A. Dalvey, v. Neenah, Inc., Avery Products Corporation, No. 2022-1333, 2022-1334, 2022-1427, 2022-1432 (Fed. Cir. October 6, 2023) (“Opinion”), the case addresses whether there was...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2023 #3

Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1765 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 24, 2023) In its only precedential patent case of the week, the Federal Circuit held the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Little Weight Given to Expert Declaration That Repeats IPR Petition

The US Patent & Trademark Office Director affirmed and designated as precedential a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision denying institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition where the expert declaration...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - September 2022

INVT SPE LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 2020-1903 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 31, 2022) - In its only precedential patent case last week, the Federal Circuit issued a lengthy opinion that revolved around claims that are drawn...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022: Split Panel Weighs General Skepticism Differently in Obviousness Inquiry

In a recent opinion by the Federal Circuit, Auris Health, Inc. v Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Case 2021-1732, the panel split on the weight of general industry skepticism in an obviousness analysis and split on...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

Linda Liu & Partners

The Standards of Proof of the “Original Scope” in the Prior-Use-Right Defense

Linda Liu & Partners on

According to the relevant provisions of the Patent Law of the People's Republic of China, if the same product has been manufactured, the same method has been used, or the necessary preparations have been made for...more

Knobbe Martens

Sounding Off: Prosecution Disclaimer Requires Unambiguous Intrinsic Evidence

Knobbe Martens on

GENUINE ENABLING TECHNOLOGY LLC V. NINTENDO CO., LTD - Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Western District of Washington. Summary: A finding of prosecution disclaimer must be supported by an unambiguous...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions: Hyatt v. Hirshfeld, 998 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2021)

In Hyatt, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed “for the first time the PTO’s assertion of a prosecution laches defense in a civil action brought by a patentee under 35 U.S.C. § 145 to obtain a patent.”...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - October 2021: Potential Pecuniary Interest In Instituting More AIA Proceedings Not Enough To...

We previously published an article discussing patent owner’s due process challenges based on alleged pecuniary interests of the Office and Administrative Patent Judges instituting cases to meet production goals and increase...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - October 2021

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Damage Expert Testimony Excluded for Failure to Disclose Evidence and to Apportion

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to preclude a damage expert from characterizing license agreements and opining on a reasonable royalty rate where the sponsoring party...more

Smart & Biggar

FCA upholds reconsideration decision maintaining $100M+ award against Apotex for cefaclor patent infringement

Smart & Biggar on

Update: On September 28, 2021, Apotex applied to the Supreme Court of Canada for leave to appeal (Docket No. 39851).  On July 23, 2021, the Federal Court of Appeal (FCA) dismissed Apotex’s appeal of the Federal Court’s (FC)...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more

Knobbe Martens

It’s a Date – Twitter Reply Proves Prior Art Publication Date

Knobbe Martens on

VIDSTREAM LLC V. TWITTER, INC. Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Evidence of a prior art reference’s publication date submitted after an IPR petition may be...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Patent Prosecution Tool Kit: The Changing Face of Non-Obviousness

It is difficult to think of a case that has had more influence on patent practice than KSR v. Teleflex (550 U.S. 398 (2007)). In KSR, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the established practice that an invention could not be...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Although the Federal Circuit faced obviousness issues that were simple to resolve in Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., it saw an opportunity to continue to clarify its jurisprudence regarding standing on appeal from an adverse final...more

Jones Day

District Courts Find PTAB Statements Constitute Disclaimer

Jones Day on

In Linksmart Wireless Tech., LLC v. Caesars Entm’t Corp., Case No. 2:18-cv-00862-MMD-NJK (D. Nev. May 8, 2020) the Court addressed disputed claim terms in U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE46,459 (the “’459 Patent”), Linksmart had...more

Knobbe Martens

Intrinsic Evidence Establishing the Context of a Claim Term Can Limit Claim Scope

Knobbe Martens on

MCRO, INC. v. BANDAI NAMCO GAMES AMERICA - Before Reyna, Mayer and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: The scope of a claim term may be limited when...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Withholding of Evidence Related to Offer for Sale, Filing False Declaration and Coercion by Patentee Support Finding of...

The Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s finding of inequitable conduct on the basis that appellants and its lawyers intentionally withheld material information involving the on-sale bar from the United States Patent &...more

Knobbe Martens

Attorneys and Clients Behaving Badly – Deliberately Withheld Offer for Sale Is Inequitable Conduct

Knobbe Martens on

GS CLEANTECH CORP. v. ADKINS ENERGY LLC - Before, Reyna, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Summary: Withholding and obscuring evidence of a pre-critical date...more

82 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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