The Perfect Patent Office Litigator
Plaintiffs Kim Laube & Co. ("Laube") brought this patent infringement action against Defendant Wahl Clipper Corp. ("Wahl") for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,473,973 ("the '973 Patent"), which is titled "Disposable Cutting...more
In This Issue:
The Blurred Lines of What Constitutes Copyright Infringement of Music: Robin Thicke v. Marvin Gaye’s Estate; Terminology in a Computer Readable Medium Claim —“Physical,” “Tangible,” or “Storage”— Can...more
On September 16, 2012, Inter Partes Review (IPR) replaced Inter Partes Reexamination (IPX) as an avenue for third party patentability challenges in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). Arising from the 2011...more
Preliminary Injunction Ordered Based on Appellate Claim Construction Aria Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc. -
Addressing a preliminary injunction filed by a defendant in a...more
In its decision on September 24th, the Federal Circuit reminded the Patent Office that the principles of due process are still alive and kicking and cannot be ignored by the Patent Office's judiciary.
The case came to...more
The Federal Circuit's jurisprudence regarding obviousness as determined by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office continues its post-KSR development in Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Ltd. v. Rea, which involves an obviousness...more
In the nine and a half months since its creation, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's (USPTO's) new inter partes review proceedings have become a popular way to attempt to invalidate a patent. As of June 25, 2013, at least...more
In Fresenius, USA Inc. v. Baxter International, Inc., the Federal Circuit interpreted the ex parte reexamination statutes (35 USC §§ 301-307) as providing that the final cancellation of claims in a reexamination proceeding is...more
In this video, Robert Greene Sterne, a founding director of intellectual property law firm Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C., describes the perfect patent office litigator to handle the new contested proceedings under...more
On March 20, 2013, in Abbott Labs. v. Cordis Corp., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Rader, Dyk,* Reyna) affirmed the district court's grant of Abbott's motion to quash two subpoenas duces tecum issued...more
What is an inter partes review?
An inter partes review (“IPR”) enables a third party to challenge one or more claims in an issued patent at the United States Patent & Trademark Office (“Office”). IPR was designed to...more
"[A]nticipation by inherent disclosure is appropriate only when the reference discloses prior art that must necessarily include the unstated limitation, [or the reference] cannot inherently anticipate the claims."...more
[T]he preamble constitutes a limitation when the claim(s) depend on it for antecedent basis, or when it "is essential to understand limitations or terms in the claim body."
On December 27, 2012, in C.W. Zumbiel Co. v....more
On Tuesday of last week, the Federal Circuit held that a party bringing a request for inter-partes reexamination may not appeal a decision by the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office that certain prior art does...more
Patent litigation can be analogized to a game of chess. In chess each player has six distinct pieces – the king, queen, rook, bishop, knight, and pawn – each with its own strengths and weaknesses. In patent litigation,...more