Patent Terms

News & Analysis as of

Court Can't Review Policy Behind Patent Term Adjustment Statute

In Singhal v. Lee, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed a complaint that challenged the Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) awarded to two patents, because the complaint failed to state a claim upon...more

Wisp of a Possibility of Gas Kit Lawsuit May Establish Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction

In a recent case concerning propane gas kits used as an alternative fuel conversion system, the District of Massachusetts found that declaratory judgment jurisdiction exists, even though the parties in the case had entered...more

Actual Notice Requirement Presents Challenge for Collecting Pre-Issuance Damages

Most patent owners are aware that under 35 U.S.C. § 154(d), publication of a United States patent application confers provisional rights to the patent owner. The provisional rights allow an owner to collect damages for...more

Claim Is Construed In Electronics Case

Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Ricoh Americas Corporation, et al., C.A. No. 13-474 – SLR-SRF, January 7, 2016. Sleet, J. Claim construction opinion issues regarding twenty three terms from three patents....more

When Prior Terminal Disclaimers Continue to Punish Subsequent Applications: A Potential Danger in Filing an Overly-Broad Terminal...

A recent U.S. District Court decision has clarified a potential danger when filing terminal disclaimers that contain overly-broad language. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Hagenbuch v. Sonrai...more

Claims Are Construed In Pharmaceutical Case

Sleet, J. Claim construction opinion issues regarding one term from two patents. The following term was considered: - “treatment for HVC”...more

Disputed Terms Are Construed Relating To On Demand Presentations

Custom Media Technologies LLC v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC C.A. Nos. 13-1421LPS; Custom Media Technologies LLC v. Dish Network, LLC, C.A. No. 13-1424, August 10, 2015 - Stark, C. J. Claim construction opinion....more

Rep. Goodlatte Releases Report on H.R. 9

Last week, Rep. Bob Goodlatte, Chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, released a 200-page Report on H.R. 9, "The innovation Act," introduced by Chairman Goodlatte with several co-sponsors earlier this year. The bill sets...more

Rebuffing Critics, Supreme Court Re-Affirms Ban on Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the collection of royalties after a patent’s expiration constitutes per se patent misuse. Brulotte has been widely criticized as economically...more

Supreme Court Upholds Brulotte Rule Prohibiting Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, upholding the rule, first announced in Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U. S. 29 (1964), that an agreement allowing a patent owner to...more

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Patent Royalties After Patent Term Expiration in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, No. 13-720...

On Monday, June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court reaffirmed its earlier precedent barring royalties on a patent after the patent term expires. Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, No. 13-720 (U.S. June 22, 2015). Justice Kagan...more

Claims Are Construed In Dispute Relating To Remote Ordering Systems.

Stark, C.J. Markman opinion issues regarding 11 groups of disputed terms from one patent. Claim construction argument was held on April 13, 2015, followed by supplemental briefing. ...more

USPTO Issues Final Rule to Implement PTA Provisions of AIA Technical Corrections Act and Provide Optional Procedure for Requesting...

On May 15, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published a Federal Register notice (79 Fed. Reg. 27755) to adopt as final changes to the rules of practice implementing the patent term adjustment (PTA) provisions of section...more

Strategic Use of Terminal Disclaimer

In Amkor Technology, Inc. v. Tessera, Inc., IPR201-00242, Paper 117, (April 14, 2014), the patent owner filed a terminal disclaimer of the remainder of the patent term (which was going to expire later in the year), to force...more

Delayed Restriction Requirement Does Not Result in Patent Term Adjustment for Divisional Application

In Mohsenzadeh v. Lee (decided March 19, 2014), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia held that the Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) statute does not provide PTA to a divisional application when the USPTO...more

Patent Term Adjustment and Double Patenting

The March 3, 2014 edition of BNA’s Patent, Trademark & Copyright Journal® — Daily Update included an interesting article by Qing (Becky) Lin about “Strategies for Minimizing Patent Term Loss Due to Double Patenting.” I agree...more

Federal Circuit Partially Confirms Longer Patent Terms Under Exelixis and Novartis

On January 15, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit confirmed that patent owners may be entitled to extended patent terms, a finding that is especially important for select pharmaceutical, biotech, and...more

Federal Circuit Decisions Result in Minor Adjustments to Patent Term Adjustment

Novartis v. Lee and Exelixis v. Lee (2013-1160, 2013-1179, 2013-1175, Fed. Cir. 2014) - Summary: For a patent application issuing after 3 years, an RCE filed at any time during prosecution will reduce patent...more

New Decision Increases Calculation Of Patent Term

Yesterday, in Novartis AG v. Lee, 2013-1160 (Fed. Cir., Jan. 15, 2014), the Federal Circuit determined that the USPTO has been incorrectly calculating patent term adjustments, potentially shortening the terms of thousands of...more

Re-Calculating Patent Term Adjustments Once Again

The Federal Circuit has adjusted the way we calculate Patent Term Adjustments (PTA) once again with its holdings in Novartis and Exelixis. The Federal Circuit held that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)...more

Novartis v. Lee: New Math for Calculating Patent Term Adjustment

Recently, in Novartis v. Lee (2013-1160, Fed. Cir., Jan. 15, 2014), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revised the method by which the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) calculates...more

Patent Term Adjustment Update - Novartis v. Lee

A recent ruling by the Federal Circuit in Novartis AG v. Lee resolved the issues raised in the Exelixis I, Exelixis II and Novartis decisions regarding the effect of a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) on patent term...more

Federal Circuit Decision Extends Potential Patent Term by Months for Many Patents

On January 15, 2014, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that patentees are eligible for patent term adjustment (PTA) for the period between a Notice of Allowance and issuance if the period occurs more than...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies Patent Term Adjustment Provisions

On January 15, 2014, the Federal Circuit issued in Novartis v. Lee its anticipated opinion regarding the proper interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 154, the statute that determines how patent term adjustment (PTA) is calculated....more

District Court Sides With USPTO on Patent Term Adjustment

In Abraxis Bioscience, LLC v. Kappos, Civil Action No. 1:11-cv-00730., (D.D.C. Jan. 08, 2014), Judge Howell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colombia upheld the USPTO’s interpretation of the Patent Term...more

32 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2
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.
×