News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Reversal

McDermott Will & Emery

A New Vision: Collateral Estoppel Doesn’t Extend to Related Claims

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court order excluding expert validity testimony based on collateral estoppel stemming from an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding of a related patent,...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

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Federal Circuit Gives a Makeover to $66 Million Judgment Against Beauty Giant

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a $66 million dollar judgment against beauty industry giant L’Oréal for patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and a related breach...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - April 2021

[co-author: Yuke Wang, Patent Agent] The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all...more

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Prior Decision on Limiting Claim Preambles

Haug Partners LLP on

On August 3, 2020, in Bio-Rad Labs., Inc. v. 10X Genomics, Inc., the Federal Circuit clarified its decision in TomTom v. Adolph regarding limiting claim preambles, holding that the preamble of the claim at issue could not be...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - June 2020

The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

In what may be simple happenstance, the Federal Circuit issued opinions on the same day reversing a District Court grant of summary judgment in opinions written by Judge Lourie, here in BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co....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

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - June 2019: Supreme Court Eliminates Government as a Party Who Can File AIA Action at PTAB

In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...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

Jones Day

Federal Agencies May Not Challenge Patents in AIA Post-Issuance Proceedings

Jones Day on

The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more

Williams Mullen

Supreme Court Holds that Government Agencies May Not Use AIA Proceedings to Challenge Patents

Williams Mullen on

On June 10, 2019 the United States Supreme Court held in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. ____ (2019) that agencies of the federal government cannot challenge the validity of a patent via USPTO...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

High Court Says Federal Agencies Cannot Seek AIA Patent Challenges

Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s finding that the government is a “person” eligible to petition for post-issuance AIA review proceedings. This 6-3 decision, Return Mail, Inc....more

Knobbe Martens

Ultratec Awarded more than $5.4 Million After Patent Determined Valid On Appeal

Knobbe Martens on

A federal court in Wisconsin recently awarded Ultratec, Inc. and Captel, Inc. more than $5.4 million in damages, based on a patent infringement claim brought against Sorenson Communications and CaptionCalls...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

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

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. Synvina...

DuPont petitioned for inter partes review of Synvina’s patent, which was directed to a method of oxidizing a chemical using a specific temperature range, pressure range, catalyst, and solvent. The prior art disclosed the...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

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

Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. Apple, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Bryson, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. Summary: (1) To uphold a jury verdict of infringement, evidence must...more

Knobbe Martens

Gust, Inc. v. Alphacap Ventures LLC

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Wallach, Linn and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Summary: In determining whether to award sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927,...more

Knobbe Martens

Trustees Of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics Co.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts Summary: A patent claim having multiple permutations is only enabled if each and...more

Knobbe Martens

Polara Engineering Inc v. Campbell Company

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Summary: (1) The public use bar is not triggered by experimental use...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

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

Reverse or Remand: What is the proper remedy on appeal where the Board fails to carry its burden?

Is there a growing split in the Federal Circuit on the proper remedy where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) fails to carry its burden? The recent precedential decision of In re Hodges, __ F.3d __, 2018 WL 817248...more

31 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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