Claim Construction

News & Analysis as of

Teva Review Standard Controls Lighting Ballast on Remand - Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Electronics North America Corp.

In yet another post-Teva claim construction case (see discussion of Teva v. Sandoz, Shire Development v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Grp. and TomTom, Inc. v. Adolph cases (this edition) the U.S....more

The Federal Circuit Reviews Patent Trial and Appeal Board Decisions on Inter Partes Review

There are now three decisions of the Federal Circuit on appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) on inter partes reviews: - In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC - Belden Inc. v. Berk-Tek LLC and -...more

Expert Testimony Not Always a Guarantee for Appellate Review with Deference - Shire Development v. Watson Pharmaceuticals; Teva...

Addressing the impact of expert testimony used during claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in a case remanded by the U.S. Supreme Court, following its January 5, 2015 decision in Teva...more

JMOL Of Infringement Is Granted Following Bench Trial

Following a bench trial on July 13 through 16, 2015, defendant challenged plaintiff’s infringement claims and both sides moved for JMOL. Defendant argued unsuccessfully that plaintiff’s expert’s testimony was improper as...more

AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd.

Case Name: AstraZeneca LP v. Breath Ltd., 2015-1335, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 7525 (Fed. Cir. May 7, 2015) - Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Pulmicort Respules® (budesonide inhalation suspension); U.S. Patent No....more

Kaneka v. Xiamen Kingdomway Group: Implicit Order Read into Method Steps of Industrial Biotechnology Patent

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Group Co. (Fed. Cir. 2015) serves as a reminder that courts may implicitly read an order into a patent’s method claim steps, even if the applicant did...more

Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

Case Name: Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc., 787 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2015) (Circuit Judges Prost, Chen, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Hughes, J.) (Appeal from S.D. Fla., Middlebrooks, J.) - Drug...more

Federal Circuit Answers Questions About Covered Business Method Review Proceedings

In Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc., the Federal Circuit outlined the permitted extent of judicial review of Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review proceedings conducted by the USPTO Patent Trial and...more

Federal Circuit Upholds Broadest Reasonable Interpretation in Inter Partes Review

A divided Federal Circuit denied the petition for rehearing en banc that would have required the court to revisit its decision in In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC (Fed Cir 2015), that upheld the USPTO’s use of the...more

Product-by-Process Claims: A Jurisdictional Overview

The Supreme Court of Japan has issued a decision which made significant changes to how product-by-process claims are handled by the Japanese Patent Office. The decision makes Japanese law on product-by-process claims similar...more

IP Newsflash - July 2015 #2

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - The Federal Circuit Rules that the PTAB’s Decision to Institute a CBM Cannot Be Challenged in Court This week, the Federal Circuit decided Versata II, a companion case to Versata Development...more

Faster Is Not Always Better: Dangers of Quickly Filed Patent Applications

The United States switched to a “first-inventor-to-file” patent system in 2013. Ever since, articles and client alerts have stressed the importance of filing your patent applications as quickly as possible. Otherwise, the...more

Federal Circuit Affirms First Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Decision in a Covered Business Method Review

On July 9, 2015, a divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed the first Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) decision concerning Covered Business Method (“CBM”) reviews, which were...more

Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Section 18 of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) established a transitional program through which the USPTO conducts post-grant reviews of covered business method (CBM) patents. For the most part, § 18 incorporates...more

Microsoft v. Proxyconn: Lessons in Claim Construction and Amendments in IPRs

Inter partes reviews (“IPRs”) are a cheaper and faster alternative to patent litigation, instituted in 2012 by the America Invents Act. IPRs allow parties to challenge the validity of patents in the U.S. Patent and Trademark...more

After Transfer, Case Is Stayed Pending IPR Even Though Only Three of Twenty-Two Claims Were at Issue in the IPR

Plaintiff ACQIS, LLC ("ACQIS") filed a patent infringement action in the Eastern District of Texas alleging that Defendant EMC Corporation ("EMC") had infringed claims in 11 patents owned by ACQIS. Specifically, ACQIS alleged...more

Versata: The Federal Circuit Explains the Parameters and Appealability of CBM Proceedings

On July 9, 2015, the Federal Circuit decided its first appeal of a covered business method (“CBM”) patent review. In Versata Development Group Inc. v. SAP America, Inc. et al., Case No. 14-1194 (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2015)...more

Federal Circuit Confirms The Use Of Broadest Reasonable Interpretation In Inter Partes Review

Since going into effect on September 16, 2012, inter partes review (IPR) has become a widely-used mechanism for challenging the validity of patents. One reason for the popularity of IPR could be that the U.S. Patent and...more

Claim Construction Opinion Issues

Cornerstone Biopharma Inc., et al. v Exela Pharma Sciences LLC, et al., C.A. No. 13-1275 - GMS, July 9, 2015. Sleet, J. The court construes 4 terms in a case with four patents in suit....more

Court Construes Various Means Plus Function Terms

Lifeport Sciences LLC v. Endologix, Inc., C.A. No. 12-1791 - GMS, July 9, 2015. Sleet, J. The court considers 10 terms for construction from four patents....more

District Court Denies Motion to Amend Complaint to Add New Patents Even Though Patents Had Not Issued at Time of Original Filing...

Plaintiff West View Research ("West View") filed five separate patent infringement complaints on the same date against various automobile manufacturers. Each action asserted a combination of patents, all from the same patent...more

Federal Circuit Attacks Functional Claim Drafting Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

In Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Networks, the Federal Circuit affirmed yet another dismissal of a patent infringement lawsuit due to the asserted patent being invalid for lacking patent eligible subject matter under 35...more

Patent Pending: The Outlook for Patent Legislation in the 114th Congress

The field of patent law is in a state of flux. Just four years after the America Invents Act (“AIA”) went into effect, Congress is taking up the issue once again, this time seeking to pass legislation to curb abusive patent...more

House Committee Advances Patent Reforms Aimed to Curb Patent Litigation Abuses

On June 11, 2015, the House Judiciary Committee voted 24-8 to approve the Innovation Act of 2015, a bill aimed to curb abusive litigation by so-called patent trolls. "Today in this committee, we are taking a pivotal step...more

9 Key Factors That Impact Patent Valuations

Figuring out what a patent is worth can often feel like black magic. But, doing so can be critical during an IP due diligence or when trying to assess the value of a company built around the intellectual property. In...more

378 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 16

"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*

*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.
×