Patent Validity Patents

News & Analysis as of

Hindsight Cannot be the Thread that Stitches the Prior Art Patches into the Claimed Invention

In Metalcraft of Mayville, Inc., v. The Toro Company, [2016-2433, 2016-2514] (February 16, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed a modified preliminary injunction against Toro’s continued infringement of U.S. Patent No....more

Can You Be Reasonably Certain a Water Balloon Is Substantially Filled? Indefiniteness in Tinnus v. Telebrands

In Tinnus Enterprises, LLV v. Telebrands Enterprises (Fed. Cir. 2016-1410), the CAFC considered whether a claim requiring that a container (think water balloon) be “substantially filled” was indefinite under 35 USC §112....more

PTAB Grants Rare IPR Request for Rehearing in WesternGeco LLC v. PGS Geophysical AS

The PTAB recently granted a request for rehearing and modified the final written decision in WesternGeco LLC v. PGS Geophysical AS, IPR2015-00313, Paper 43 (P.T.A.B., Feb. 3, 2017). This is an extremely rare event....more

No Stay Pending IPR in Brewing Patent Dispute

District court patent defendants often request a parallel inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding at the U.S. Patent Office to challenge the validity of the patent at issue. As such IPR proceedings have the potential to kill...more

Apotex’s Infringement of AstraZeneca’s Omeprazole Formulation Patent Upheld

The Federal Court of Appeal, in a unanimous decision released on January 12, 2017 (2017 FCA 9), has affirmed the validity of AstraZeneca’s Patent No. 1,292,693. The patent covered AstraZeneca’s successful product, LOSEC, for...more

Instructions Induced Prescribing Physicians to Infringe

In Eli Lilly and Company v. Teva Parenteral Medicines, Inc., [2015-2067] (January 12, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed judgment of inducement of infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209, and that the the asserted claims...more

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Patent Invalidation Based on Lack of APA Due Process

Inter partes review (IPR) petitioners must ensure adequate notice of arguments against validity; patent owners must preserve rights to defend against all arguments raised by petitioners—even when they arise late in the...more

Federal Circuit Rejects Patentee’s Effort to Narrow Claim Scope

One wrinkle of IPR practice is that patentees are often in the position of advocating a narrower claim scope than the challenger — just the opposite of what is usually seen in district court litigation. The narrowing...more

Medtronic v. Robert Bosch – Has the Federal Circuit closed the door on reviewing IPR institution decisions?

On October 20, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued yet another opinion finding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decisions related to the institution of an inter partes review (IPR) are not subject to judicial review. ...more

District Courts on Willful Infringement Post-Halo

In two recent decisions addressing the issue of willful infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recalled its mandate, vacated portions of earlier decisions and remanded to the district court the...more

Smartphone Patent War: En Banc Federal Circuit Rebukes Earlier Panel Decision and Reinstates Jury Verdicts for Apple against...

In its October 7 en banc decision in Apple v. Samsung, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, without benefit of en banc briefing, issued an unusual opinion overturning a panel decision for the purpose of...more

PTAB Rejects Consideration of New Issues on Remand

Addressing the scope of a remand from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) declined to consider evidence and arguments presented for the first time on remand....more

PTO Must Apply Phillips Standard when Construing Expired Patents **WEB ONLY**

In an opinion addressing the standard for claim construction of a patent that expires during reexamination, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s or Board’s)...more

CAFC’s Husky Decision Makes Sledding Tougher for Patent Owners in PTAB Appeals

The Federal Circuit recently determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that assignor estoppel has no affect in an inter partes review (“IPR”). The majority’s decision...more

PTAB Refusal to Permit Claim Amendments Remanded

Addressing the standard for granting a motion to amend claims in inter partes review (IPR), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected a conclusion by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) that the...more

Substantial Evidence Supported Infringement of Limitations That Did Not Need Construction

In Lifenet Health v. Lifecell Corporation, [2015-1549](September 16, 2016) the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s judgment that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,569,200 on plasticized soft tissue grafts suitable for...more

Federal Circuit: Go whole-hog on validity below if you want to contest an independent determination of invalidity on appeal

Think you’ve won on validity at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and your claims are safe on appeal? “Not so fast,” says the Federal Circuit in Software Rights Archive, LLC v....more

McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Patentee McRO sued a number of video game developers and publishers in the Central District of California and the District of Delaware for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,307,576 and 6,611,278. Several of the...more

UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research and Development Co. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

On September 08, 2016, in UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research and Development Co., the Federal Circuit affirmed the determination by the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia that UCB's Cimzia® brand antibody does not...more

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2016)

Core Wireless Licensing brought an action against LG Electronics in the Eastern District of Texas. Core contended that LG infringed claim 21 of its U.S. Patent No. 7,804,850. LG moved for summary judgment on the grounds...more

U.S. Appeals Court Finds a Software Patent Valid Even Under the Supreme Court’s “Alice” Test

A recent Federal Circuit decision in Bascom Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, gives patent owners another illustration of patent subject matter eligibility under section 101....more

Ariosa Loses Verinata Patent Challenge

Fetal diagnostic pioneer Ariosa Diagnostics lost its latest attempt to invalidate competitor Verinata Health’s U.S. Patent No. 8,318,430, “Methods of Fetal Abnormality Detection.” The USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Construing Markush Group Claims

In Multilayer Stretch Cling Film v. Berry Plastics, the Federal Circuit provided a detailed discussion of the construction of claims that use Markush group language. The decision emphasizes the closed nature of the...more

A legal look at Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions and trends: PTAB Statistics - Then and Now

The Inter Partes Review (IPR) and Covered Business Method (CBM) procedures were enacted on September 16, 2012. Since then, the PTAB has released data on a monthly basis to illustrate the trends in the various petitions and...more

En Banc Federal Circuit To Review Standards for Amending Claims During AIA Proceedings

In a rare grant of a petition for rehearing en banc, the court decided that an appeal “warrants en banc consideration” of who bears what burden when amending in an IPR. In re: Aqua Products, No. 15-1177, slip op. at 2 (Fed....more

37 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2
Popular Topics

"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.
×