News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Patent Trial and Appeal Board Appeals

Knobbe Martens

Platinum Cannot Stand on Speculation

Knobbe Martens on

Before Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Standing based on potential infringement liability requires concrete plans for future activity which will create a substantial risk of future infringement...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Written Description Support for Narrow Claim Range via Disclosure of Broader Ranges, Vacates PTAB Decision

The Federal Circuit recently vacated a PTAB decision that claims of an “e-cigarette” patent were unpatentable for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. § 112. The question on appeal was whether a claimed range was...more

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Will Federal Circuit Soften Test for Design Patent Obviousness?

AEON Law on

An en banc panel of the Federal Circuit recently heard arguments in a case that could change how courts assess design patents for “obviousness.” LKQ Corporation and GM Global Technology Operations LLC are engaged in a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Wave Goodbye: Arguments Incorporated by Reference Are Waived

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s patentability determination, finding that the patent challenger waived an argument it attempted to incorporate by reference to another...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions: Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., 6 F.4th 1256 (Fed....

Intel Corp. petitioned for six inter partes reviews (IPRs) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675, a patent directed to power management in wireless devices. In each proceeding, Intel and patent-owner Qualcomm...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2021 #2

Kannuu Pty Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Appeal No. 2021-1638 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2021) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed whether a forum selection clause in an NDA may prohibit a party from...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - September #2

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - In Re MAXPOWER SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. [ORDER]  (2021-146, 9/8/21) (O’Malley, Reyna, Chen) - Reyna, J.  Denying mandamus petition and dismissing appeal.  The Court declined to...more

Harris Beach PLLC

Important 2020 Patent Law Decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Harris Beach PLLC on

Whether you are pursuing patents on your new technology, thinking about bringing patent infringement litigation or defending patent infringement claims in court, knowing the important developments in patent law will help you...more

Jones Day

Staying Still: District Court Extends Stay Pending Appeal

Jones Day on

District courts commonly stay patent litigation cases pending inter parties review (IPR) that assesses the validity of the patents-in-suit before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Such stay may be lifted or extended...more

Ladas & Parry LLP

Thryv Inc. v. Click-to-call Technologies LP

Ladas & Parry LLP on

The question of whether the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has any right to examine a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to institute inter partes review or post...more

Sunstein LLP

FanDuel Learns the Hard Way: An IPR Challenge to Any Patent Claim May be Lost if Not Comprehensive and Rigorous Enough

Sunstein LLP on

As we demonstrated in our own successful appeal, Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016), a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) may fail when an expert declaration lacks detailed explanation. An expert’s...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Observations on Cancelled Argument Cases: Appellees Always Win, Right? (Mostly)

Next week is Court week. Readers may remember that, after the Court released the September calendar, we predicted that the submission trend would continue. Were we right? Sort of....more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - July 2020: Federal Circuit Confirms PTAB's Ability to Consider Subject Matter Eligibility of...

On July 22, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued an opinion in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC & Netflix, Inc., No. 2019-1686 (Fed. Cir. 2020) authorizing the U.S. Patent Trial &...more

Harris Beach PLLC

Prevent Your Licensee From Instituting Inter Partes Review with a Forum Selection Clause

Harris Beach PLLC on

Courts have a general policy prohibiting licensees from challenging patent validity (even though the licensee may have voluntarily agreed to forego challenges as a part of the negotiation). In Lear, Inc. v. Atkins, the...more

Sunstein LLP

Court’s Strict Interpretation of Timing Requirement May Force Patent Validity Challenges in Two Forums

Sunstein LLP on

The America Invents Act (“AIA”), signed into law in 2011, introduced inter partes review (“IPR”), which allows parties to challenge the validity of patent claims in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Generic Drug Developer Lacks Standing to Appeal Adverse IPR Ruling

The Federal Circuit recently held a generic drug developer lacked Article III standing to appeal an adverse patentability determination by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) because it failed to prove that it suffered...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Henny Penny Corp. v. Frymaster LLC, 938 F.3d 1324 (Fed....

Henny Penny petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Frymaster’s U.S. Patent 8,497,691. The ’691 patent relates to deep fryers and describes a system for measuring the state of cooking oil degradation with a “total polar...more

Knobbe Martens

No Appeal of PTAB’s Final Decision by Appealing a District Court’s Adoption of That Decision

Knobbe Martens on

PERSONAL AUDIO, LLC v. CBS CORPORATION - Before Moore, Reyna, and Taranto.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: The Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction to hear...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights - September 2019: Federal Circuit Confirms in BioDelivery v. Aquestive that the PTAB Has Broad,...

In BioDelivery Sciences Int’l v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., the Federal Circuit confirmed that the PTAB has broad discretion to reconsider institution decisions and terminate instituted proceedings even after trial has...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Competitor Standing for Appeal of IPR Decision Upholding Claims

Again addressing the question of appellate standing for inter partes review (IPR) decisions, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that an IPR petitioner did not show a sufficient injury to confer Article III...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Retroactive Application of IPRs to Pre-AIA Patents is not Unconstitutional Taking

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time whether the retroactive application of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings to pre-America Invents Act (AIA) patents is an unconstitutional taking...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - September 2019

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - BioDelivery Sciences Int’l, Inc. v. Aquestive Therapeutics, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2019-1643, -1644, -1645 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 29, 2019) - Our case of the week this week focuses on Section 314(d)—the...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2019

Knobbe Martens on

One-year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties that Become Privies of the Litigant Prior to Institution. In Power Integrations, Inc v. Semiconductor Components, Appeal No. 2018-1607, the Federal...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Reasonably Continuous Diligence Is Not Negated If an Inventor Works On Improvements or Evaluates Alternatives to the Claimed Invention - In ATI Technologies ULC v. IANCU, Appeal Nos. 2016-2222, -2406, -2608, the Federal...more

52 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

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