News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Reaffirmation

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.

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

Knobbe Martens

Non-Prior Art Evidence May Be Used to Prove Inherency

Knobbe Martens on

HOSPIRA, INC. V. FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Moore.  Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Summary:  Evidence of the properties of claimed embodiments may be...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

Knobbe Martens

TEK Global, S.R.L. v. Sealant Systems International

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Dyk, and Wallach. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: When the Federal Circuit holds that a combination of references...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - January 2019

Knobbe Martens on

A Post-URAA Patent that Issues After but Expires Before a Related Pre-URAA Patent Is Not a Double-Patenting Reference Against the Pre-URAA Patent - In Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical Inc.,...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - December 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in the IPR Context - In Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1525, 2017-1577, the Federal Circuit held that the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously...more

Knobbe Martens

Hamilton Beach Brands, Inc. v. F'Real Foods, LLC

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Reyna, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party must file a cross-appeal when their argument requires modification of a decision. Under the...more

Knobbe Martens

Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously leaves no room for assignor estoppel to apply in...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2018

Knobbe Martens on

The Board’s Final Written Decision Must Address All Grounds for Unpatentability Raised in a Petition for Inter Partes Review - In Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2018-1180, 2018-1181, the Federal Circuit held that...more

Knobbe Martens

01 Communique Laboratory, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, Mayer, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Summary: While there is not a “practicing the prior art” defense to literal...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB: Summaries of Key 2017 Decisions

In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more

Smart & Biggar

Gilead prevails in SOVALDI appeal

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Reverses-in-Part PTAB’s IPR Decisions for Wasica’s Tire Pressure Monitoring Patents

Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part the PTAB’s final written decisions on Wasica’s tire pressure monitoring patents in Wasica Finance GmbH v. Continental Automotive Sys., Inc., No. 2015-2078 (Fed. Cir....more

17 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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