Patents

News & Analysis as of

The Iron Law of Unintended Consequences - (with apologies to Robert Michels)

It is a certainty that no matter what action is taken (by an individual, a group, or especially a legislative body) that there will be unintended consequences. It is also true that those unintended consequences, like the...more

Combinations of Predictable Elements from the Prior Art Need Not Be Advantageous - Nuvasive, Inc. v. Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc.

Addressing the propriety of combining prior art in an obviousness analysis, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) determined that a patent for a spinal implant for...more

Limitations on New Arguments and Legal Authority Presented at Oral Hearing - Intri-Plex Technologies Inc. v. Saint-Gobain...

The U. S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) provided further guidance as to what new matter may properly be raised during oral argument, explaining that parties may not present new...more

Tips for Developing a Cost-Effective Foreign Patent Strategy

According to a recent survey of over 100 companies and universities, nearly 93% who filed patent families in 2013 filed at least some of those patent families internationally. While obtaining patent protection abroad is...more

Supreme Court Announces Standard of Review for Factual Issues Underlying Patent Claim Construction: Implications Beyond Patent Law

The United States Supreme Court, clarifying the proper standard of review of factual findings arising during a court’s construction of patent claims, held that such “evidentiary underpinnings” should be reviewed for clear...more

Software Claim Is Held Unpatentable; Disputed Terms Are Not Indefinite

Following a 9-day jury trial, a mistrial was declared due to a hung jury. The court granted JMOL with respect to invalidity of certain claims. New trial dates were set for remaining claims, and the court addresses here...more

Court Precludes Expert’s Lost Profits Testimony

Andrews, J. Defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiff’s expert’s testimony is granted with respect to lost profits and denied with respect to reasonable royalty. The court took testimony and held oral argument on January 30,...more

Court Denies Request For Documents

Defendant seeks documents on the basis of the crime-fraud exception relating to abandonment and revival of a patent application which eventually issued. ...more

Pharmaceutical Patent Score a Win - Amneal Pharms., LLC v. Supernus Pharms., Inc.

In three separate but related final written decisions in the first successful defense of a pharmaceutical patent in an inter partes review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Post-Alice District Court Decisions Regarding the Patent Eligibility of Computer-Implemented Inventions

It has been about 9 months since Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International was decided by the Supreme Court. In that time, many district court and Federal Circuit cases have resulted in grants of summary judgment or dismissal...more

Draft Available Only as a Password-Protected Download Is Not a Printed Publication - Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. Rembrandt...

Addressing a petition to institute an inter partes review of a patent for communicating between different modem types, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) declined to institute...more

Changes Coming in U.S. Design Patent Law and Procedures

A design patent has long been available in the United States for protecting the ornamental appearance of an article of manufacture (sometimes referred to as an "industrial design"). Thus, design patents can be generally...more

Don’t Jeopardize Your Patent Rights: Best Patent Practices for Startups

For young, startup companies, the landscape of patents can be difficult to navigate. Patents are expensive and complex and require substantial time and money that are often at a premium for startup companies. At the same...more

Court Cites Objects of Invention in Claim Construction

Pacing Technologies, LLC v. Garmin International, Inc. is one of those Federal Circuit decisions that may send patent practitioners running to their files to double-check the phrasing used in their patent applications. Not...more

Takeda Pharms. USA, Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Corp.,

Case Name: Takeda Pharms. USA, Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm. Corp., Civ. No. 14-1268-SLR, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 155981 (D. Del. Nov. 4, 2014) (Robinson, J.) (Given statements made in the accused product’s proposed labeling,...more

Prepare for the Japanese Patent Opposition System Coming Soon

The Japanese Patent Act was revised on May 14, 2014 to provide for post-grant oppositions within one year of the rule change, i.e., by May 14, 2015 (the exact effective date has not yet been set). Under the new opposition...more

The Supreme Court's Growing Intellectual Property Docket

In the closing decades of the twentieth century, the United States Supreme Court appeared to follow an informal policy of benign neglect toward the law of intellectual property. The Court entertained a case every few years...more

Who You Gonna Call? The Board!

The PTAB issued an order providing guidance for responding to potential witness coaching during a deposition recess. Cases IPR2014-00411 and IPR2014-00434 – FLIR Systems, Inc. v. Leak Surveys, Inc. - In an inter...more

Divided Federal Circuit Panel Upholds Patent Office’s “Broadest Reasonable Interpretation” Standard for Construing Claims in...

In a 2-1 decision in In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC, No. 14-1301 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2015), the Federal Circuit recently held that the Patent Office may apply the “broadest reasonable interpretation” standard to construe...more

Supplementing Information - Post-Institution Pacific Market International, LLC v. Ignite USA, LLC

Addressing a motion to submit supplemental information after institution, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) granted the motion, finding that the information—a supplemental...more

Cubist Pharms., Inc. v. Hospira, Inc.

Case Name: Cubist Pharms., Inc. v. Hospira, Inc., No. 12-367-GMS, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169679 (D. Del. Dec. 8, 2014) (Sleet, J.) (Valid certificate of correction results in finding of infringement and validity; remaining...more

Rosebud v. Adobe: District Court Grants Summary Judgment of No Remedies Where Plaintiff Could Not Prove Actual Notice of Patent...

Rosebud filed a patent infringement action Adobe and Adobe moved for summary judgment arguing that Rosebud had no remedy for its patent against Adobe. Adobe based its summary judgment motion on the argument that the...more

Declarant Must Be Made Available for Deposition in the United States - Square, Inc. v. REM Holdings 3, LLC

Addressing the location of a deposition of patent owner’s declarant, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that, absent an agreement between the parties to...more

Final Decision in NuVasive’s Inter Partes Review of Warsaw Orthopedic Patent

The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (the “Board”) recently issued Final Written Decisions disposing of two inter partes reviews that NuVasive filed in mid-2013 regarding U.S. patent number 8,444,696 (the ’696 Patent). The ’696...more

Spineology Sues Wright Medical Technology

Spineology, Inc. sued Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (Wright Medical) in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota . Spineology’s complaint alleges that Wright Medical’s X-REAM percutaneous expandable...more

4,070 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 163