Claim Construction

News & Analysis as of

Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Appellate Standard of Review Over Patent Claim Construction

The United States Supreme Court heard oral argument October 15, 2014, in Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854. (The transcript and audio recording are available here.) The question before the Court in this case...more

Supreme Court: Should Appeal Give Deference to Lower Courts on Claim Construction?

On October 15, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. v. Sandoz Inc., et al., case number 13-854. At issue is the level of deference that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

Teva v. Sandoz -- Is Deferential Review a Boon for Patent Trolls?

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. case to determine whether appellate courts should afford any deference to a trial court's claim construction...more

Board Disagrees with Claim Construction of Prior Proceeding Before the PTO

One of the more disheartening trends to Patent Owners in inter partes review proceedings is the strong willingness of the PTAB to give little or no deference to prior Patent Office proceedings relative to the patent-at-issue....more

Claim Construction Clarified, Not Changed, Post-Verdict

Mformation Technologies v. Research In Motion - Addressing whether a district court’s post-verdict ruling on judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) constituted an improper change in claim construction, the U.S. Court of...more

Teva v. Sandoz -- Supreme Court Preview

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. case to determine whether appellate courts should afford any deference to a trial court's claim construction...more

Teva v. Sandoz Puts Patent Claim Construction in the Spotlight—Again

On October 15, 2014, the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. The case involves claims regarding generic versions of Teva’s multiple sclerosis drug, Copaxone®. The...more

Federal Circuit Schedules Argument for First IPR Final Written Decision – In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC

As we have been reporting, the U.S. Patent Office has requested comments on the trial proceedings under the America Invents Act. Out of the 17 issues outlined, the Office highlighted two for which it would especially...more

Federal Circuit Review - September 2014

Misrepresentation Regarding Prior Art Lead to Inequitable Conduct - In APOTEX INC. v. UCB, INC., Appeal No. 2013-1674, the Federal Circuit affirmed a judgment of inequitable conduct. Apotex sued UCB for patent...more

IP Newsflash - September 2014 #2

Airline Rewards Conversion Method Invalid Under Alice and Bilski - On September 2, 2014, Federal Circuit Judge William Bryson, sitting by designation in the Eastern District of Texas, ruled that two patents on a...more

Allergan, Inc. v. Apotex, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)

In a not particularly well-written opinion that breaks no new ground, the Federal Circuit considered a consolidated appeal of two patents directed to methods of promoting hair growth, including, in particular, eyelash hair...more

Judge McMahon issues claim construction unconstrained by two courts’ prior constructions

Judge McMahon construed terms of U.S. Patent No. 7,346,156 (“Methods and apparatuses for placing a telephone call”). The patent had previously been construed in Stanacard, LLC v. Rebtel Networks, AB, 680 F. Supp. 2d 483...more

Ongoing Developments in Patent Law: Claim Construction on Appeal, Indefiniteness, and PTAB Decisions

There are a few patent cases to keep track of in the future that may have an impact on claim construction, indefiniteness, and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions. ...more

Patent Expiry During IPR Means Phillips, not BRI, Applies

We previously discussed one Patent Owner’s attempt to avoid the “broadest reasonable interpretation” (BRI) claim construction standard by disclaiming the remainder of the patent-at-issue’s term. While some uncertainty about...more

More Details, Details

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Affinity Labs of Texas, IPR2014-01184, Paper 3, IPR2014-01182, Paper 3, IPR2014-01181, Paper 3, August 5, 2014), the Board granted the Petition a filing date, but gave the petitioner five...more

Supreme Court's Decision on Indefiniteness Constitutes Basis to Reconsider Prior Claim Construction Order But Does Not Result in...

In this patent infringement action, Defendant Lighthouse Photonics Corporation's ("Lighthouse") moved to reconsider the Court's Claim Construction Order. Lighthouse argued three reasons for reconsideration: "first, Newport...more

On a Plain and Ordinary Meaning of “Embedded” Code in a Web Page

Augme Techs., Inc. v. Yahoo! Inc. - Addressing a district court’s construction of the claim term “embedded” code as code “written into the HTML code of the web page” and the related summary judgment of non-infringement...more

Pre-suit Claim Construction Analysis Must Satisfy Rule 11

Source Vagabond Sys. Ltd. v. Hydrapak, Inc. - Addressing the reasonableness of a pre-filing claim construction analysis in the context of Rule 11 sanctions, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a...more

Lie Still: Claim Construction on Hospital Bed Unduly Limited

Hill-Rom Services, Inc. v. Stryker Corp. - Addressing whether there were any reasons to depart from the plain and ordinary meaning of terms in claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

Getting Around the Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard

Among the advantages to inter partes review proceedings, for petitioners, is the ability to have the limitations of subject patent claims evaluated pursuant to a “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard (“BRI”), instead...more

Judge Rakoff Decides Claim Construction

Judge Rakoff construed the following terms in U.S. Patent No. 6,585,516 (“Method and system for computerized visual behavior analysis, training, and planning”) and its associated ’516 Patent Reexamination Certificate. ...more

The Federal Circuit Reverse a Finding of Anticipation of the PTAB in Inter Partes Review

In re Rambus, Inc. - Addressing a finding of anticipation by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Recent SCOTUS Decisions in Intellectual Property Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court heard a landmark number of intellectual property cases during its 2013-2014 term. Below is a summary of recent decisions issued in 2014....more

The PTAB Was Right the First Time

EMC Corp. v. PersonalWeb Technologies, LLC - In a final written decision in an inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determined that under the broadest reasonable interpretation claim...more

More Details, Details

Integrated Global Concepts, Inc. v. J2 Global, Inc., IPR2014-01027, Paper 4 (July 7, 2014), the Board granted the petition a filing date, but required the petition to fix the claim charts, which may not “include arguments,...more

152 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 7