Obviousness

News & Analysis as of

PTAB Reversed for Failing to Explain “Why” a Person of Skill Would Modify the Prior Art

It is no secret that patent owners have, on average, struggled at the PTAB over the last three and a half years. Some practitioners say that a reason for this result is that the Board many times takes an aggressive approach...more

Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc. v. Illumina Cambridge Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Have you ever mixed up the obviousness determinations of "motivation to combine" and "reasonable expectation of success"? If so, you are apparently not alone -- the Federal Circuit recently faulted the Patent Trial and...more

PTAB Institutes IPR on Humira Patent

As we previously reported, the PTAB instituted IPR on U.S. Patent 8,889,135, which is drawn to a method of treating rheumatoid arthritis (“RA”) with Humira®, a TNFa-inhibitor. Claim 1 is directed to “A method for treating...more

In re TLI Communications LLC Patent Litigation (Fed. Cir. 2016)

This case is notable mainly because it is the first Federal Circuit decision to distinguish itself from Enfish LLC v. Microsoft Corp., and also because it is another reminder that the wall between patentable subject matter,...more

Breaking News: PTAB Institutes IPR on Humira® Patent

On May 17, 2016, the PTAB instituted IPR proceedings on claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 8,889,135, drawn to a method of treating a rheumatoid arthritis patient with a TNFa-inhibitor. Humira®, marketed by Abbvie, is allegedly...more

Judgment Issues For Plaintiffs In ANDA Case

Sleet, J. The court issues findings of fact and conclusions of law and rules on post-trial motions. A 4-day trial took place between November 9-13, 2015. The disputed product is generic forms of plerixafor, which is...more

Federal Circuit Affirms Exclusion of IPR Reply that Raised New Grounds of Invalidity

In Intelligent Bio-Systems, Inc., v, Illumina Cambridge Ltd., [2015-1693] (May 9, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s Final Written decision that the challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,566,537, directed to a...more

Patents-In Suit In ANDA Trial Are Non-Obvious

A 6-day bench trial was held from April 6-14, 2015. After trial, the court entered stipulations and orders regarding infringement of certain claims of the ‘178 and ‘206 patents. The court rejected defendant’s claim that the...more

Post-Trial Finding Of Non-Obviousness Issues

A 6-day bench trial was held from April 6-14, 2015. The court considers post-trial findings of fact and conclusions of law relating to validity of U.S. Patent No. 8,613,950 challenged by defendant on the basis of obviousness....more

Not Obvious to Combine for a Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA)

Summary: Appellant appealed to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) an obviousness rejection to claims directed to a user interface that displays currency trading information. Appellant argued in the appeal that the...more

Between a Rock and a Hard Place: Federal Circuit Says It's Required to Accord the PTAB Deference Until Instructed Otherwise by...

On Tuesday, April 26, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a petition filed by Merck & Cie for rehearing en banc of an Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Institution of IPR Supports No Willful Infringement

An invalid patent cannot be infringed. Regardless, the Supreme Court recently held a good faith belief in the invalidity of a patent does not negate a finding of induced infringement. But what about willfulness – can a good...more

Kevin A. O’Connor, Ph.D and Kevin C. May File Amicus Brief on Behalf of IPLAC

On April 15, 2016, Kevin A. O’Connor, Ph.D and Kevin C. May, partners in the Intellectual Property & Technology Transactions practice group, filed an amicus brief in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

Jazz Xyrem + Valproate Patent Claims Avoid IPR

The USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decided not to institute inter partes review (IPR) of key claims of Jazz’s U.S. Patent 8,772,306, which is listed in the Orange Book for Xyrem®. Although the PTAB did institute...more

Fish & Richardson Obtains Full Federal Circuit Reversal for Cutsforth, Inc. After Faulty Inter Partes Review

Decision is first-ever full reversal of an IPR decision of non-patentability; clears way for infringement lawsuit to proceed against MotivePower, Inc. Fish & Richardson’s appellate and post-grant teams won a major victory for...more

Presumptions Can Apply in Inter Partes PTAB Proceedings - PPC Broadband, Inc. v. Corning Optical Commc’n RF, LLC

Addressing issues of claim construction and obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed, vacated and remanded in part the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s or Board’s) obviousness conclusion,...more

20-Year Zoltek Litigation Continues: Federal Circuit Reverses CFC Invalidity Ruling on Written Description, Obviousness Grounds - ...

Addressing written description and obviousness issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the US Court of Federal Claims (CFC), holding that the CFC erred in finding the claims invalid under 35 USC § 112...more

TriVascular, Inc. v. Samuels (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Early last month, the Federal Circuit addressed an important question regarding the interplay between a decision to institute inter partes review before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the ultimate determination by the...more

Purdue Pharma L.P. v. Depomed, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Last Thursday, the Federal Circuit handed down its non-precedential decision in Purdue Pharma v. Depomed, reviewing the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on three related inter partes reviews. While not quite a...more

Sometimes the Application of a New Technology is Obvious from the New Technology itself

In In re Cree, [2015-1365] (March 21, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the PTAB in an ex parte reexamination that the claims directed to the production of white light through the “down-conversion” of blue...more

Federal Circuit Review | March 2016

Under O2 Micro, a District Court Must Provide a Claim Construction if the Parties Dispute the Meaning of a Claim Term - In Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Springs Networks, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1237, the Federal...more

IP Newsflash - March 2016

DISTRICT COURT CASES - New York Court Invalidates Targeted-Advertising Patents under Alice - A federal judge in the Southern District of New York granted counterclaim-defendant TNS’s motion for summary judgment...more

PTAB Denies Lupin’s IPR in Win for Pozen – Claimed Tablet That Provided Coordinated Drug Release Not Suggested by Prior Art, Which...

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently denied institution of a Lupin inter partes review against a Pozen patent covering VIMOVO® (naproxen/esomeprazole magnesium delayed-release tablets, commercially sold by Horizon...more

Method of Treatment Claims Cancelled in View of Prior Art under Theory of Obviousness, but Not Anticipation - Eli Lilly and Co. v....

In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) found all of Los Angeles Biomedical Research Institute’s (LA-Bio Med) patent claims unpatentable on the basis of obviousness in view of a...more

Expected Toxicity of Claimed Immunoconjugates Thwarts Showing of Prima Facie Obviousness (Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc.,...

In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) upheld the patentability of Phigenix’s patent claims that were challenged on the basis of obviousness. Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc.,...more

301 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 13
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.
×