News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Patents

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In Allied v. OSMI, the Circuit affirms dismissal of a declaratory judgment action even though Allied’s Mexican distributors had been sued in Mexico on a corresponding Mexican patent. In a first Waymo v. Uber case, the panel...more

Not Every Instance of an Agency Reaching Inconsistent Outcomes in Similar, Related Cases will Necessarily be Erroneous

In Vicor Corp. v. Synqor, Inc., [2016-2283] (August 30, 2017) the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded the Board’s decisions in two reexaminations, one in which the Board found that certain claims...more

Considering the Human Elements in IP Litigation

At the heart of intellectual property litigation are people: People who are disputing the uniqueness and similarities of products and trademarks. The dispute is resolved through the decisions made by judges, arbiters, and...more

Federal Circuit Concurring Opinion Asks Whether the Exception To One-Year Time Bar For Filing Inter Partes Review Petitions Via...

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Nidec Motor Corp. v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor Co., No. 2016-2321 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 22, 2017), a concurring opinion by Judges Dyk and Wallach questioned whether petitioners may use joinder to circumvent time bar...more

Gilead prevails in SOVALDI appeal

by Smart & Biggar on

The Federal Court of Appeal recently affirmed a trial decision relating to two competing patents over Gilead’s SOVALDI (sofosbuvir). In the trial decision, as previously reported, the Court declared Idenix’s Patent No....more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

This was a busy week for precedential cases at the Circuit. In AIA v. Avid, the Circuit rules that there is no right to a jury trial as to requests for attorney fees under § 285. In Romag v. Fossil, a majority rules that the...more

Interplay Between “Technological Invention” and “Significantly More” in PTAB CBM Review

by Knobbe Martens on

On July 18, 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) instituted a covered business method (“CBM”) patent review for U.S. Patent No. 8,955,029 (“the ’029 patent”) on grounds of...more

10 Questions You Always Wanted to Ask About Patent Litigation in Germany

by Reed Smith on

With the proposed European patent litigation system now stalled for at least the near future, a key question for U.S. life sciences companies in their European patent litigation strategy will continue to be in which countries...more

No Stay of Remedial Orders Even After PTAB Finds Claims Unpatentable

by Jones Day on

The ITC has dealt a significant blow to the use of Inter Partes Review as a defense to a Section 337 investigation. In an order issued this week, the Commission denied a request to stay remedial orders that are currently on...more

Rx IP Update - July 2017

by Smart & Biggar on

Supreme Court of Canada strikes down "promise doctrine", upholds AstraZeneca’s NEXIUM patent as useful - As previously reported, on June 30, 2017, the Supreme Court of Canada granted AstraZeneca’s appeal in the NEXIUM...more

UK Supreme Court broadens scope of patent protection

by Dechert LLP on

The UK Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Actavis v Eli Lilly sets out a revised approach to assessing the scope of protection of patents. The new approach is likely to confer greater protection on patent owners, by providing...more

Federal Circuit Finds That Fetal Diagnosis Claims Survive Written Description Attacks

by Knobbe Martens on

Stanford University v. The Chinese University of Hong Kong. Federal Circuit Appeal No. 2015-2011. Decided June 27, 2017. In an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Federal Circuit held that claims...more

Design Patents at the PTAB?

by Jones Day on

In the wake of the high-profile dispute in Apple v. Samsung, design patent procurement and enforcement activity has increased significantly. But practitioners may not appreciate that design patent validity can be attacked...more

The STRONGER Patents Act: Swinging the Pendulum in Favor of Patent Owners

by Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

While the House Judiciary Committee conducts hearings today on "The Impact of Bad Patents on American Businesses," a movement is afoot in the Senate to revitalize the U.S. patent system. On June 21, 2017, a bipartisan group...more

Lack of Clarity for Reason for Denying Permanent Injunction Results in Remand

In Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Corp., [2017-1148] (July 1-, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated the denial of a permanent injunction and remanded for reconsideration....more

PTO Erred by Not Identifying Algorithm Corresponding to §112, ¶ 6 Element Before Invalidating Claims

In IPCOM GmbH & Co. v. HRC Corp., [2016-1474] (July 7, 2017) the Federal Circuit found that the Board failed to conduct a proper claim construction of the “arrangement for reactivating the link” claim limitation, and...more

Dow obtains largest Canadian patent infringement award in history

by Smart & Biggar on

The Federal Court has issued its Further Judgment and Reasons (2017 FC 637) concerning the amount of financial compensation to be paid to the Dow Chemical Company as a result of earlier patent infringement and validity...more

EP Opposition and US Inter Partes Review Decisions Go Hand In Hand

It is often desirable to obtain patent protection for inventions both in Europe and the United States. As a result, competitors frequently look to Europe and the US as important jurisdictions for challenging the validity of a...more

PTAB Invalidates Two Cisco Patents Found Valid and Infringed at the ITC

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued Final Written Decisions regarding Cisco’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,377,577 (the “’577 Patent”) and 7,023,853 (the “’853 Patent”) on May 25, 2017 and U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 (the...more

Estoppel in CBMR is Both Reviewable and Determined on a Claim by Claim Basis

In Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, [2016-2001](June 9, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB decision that Westlake was not estopped to bring a Covered Business Method Review challenge to U.S. Patent No....more

Supreme Court to Hear Another IPR Case — SAS Institute v. Lee

The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in another Inter Partes Review dispute, this time in SAS Institute v. Lee. The Court will decide whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may properly institute partial review (i.e.,...more

How Far Is Too Far? Institution Decision to Final Written Decision

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In making a final written decision of AIA proceedings, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) is not bound by findings made in an institution decision. In three recent decisions, the Federal Circuit considered the...more

Summaries of All Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases Decided Since Jun. 1, 2016

This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. Please see full publication below for more information....more

Potential Impact of the Supreme Court’s Decision to Review the PTAB’s Practice of Issuing Partial Final Written Decisions in...

In a case with potential wide-ranging ramifications for patent validity challenges, on May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court granted a writ of certiorari in an appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”) decision, SAS Institute v....more

Supreme Court Will Decide Whether the PTAB Must Address All Claims Challenged in a Petition

by Knobbe Martens on

The Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari to address whether the PTAB is required to issue a final written decision with respect to the patentability of every claim challenged by a petitioner in SAS...more

83 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
Cybersecurity

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

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