Patents

News & Analysis as of

What are the Implications of Alice v. CLS? [Video]

While the Supreme Court’s ruling in Alice v. CLS Bank does not mean that software is ineligible for patent protection, the decision leaves many questions on patent eligibility unanswered. In the second video of a two-part...more

IPR Proceedings Filed Eight Months Apart Is Too Long to Permit Joinder

In the Macronix International Co., Ltd. et al. v. Spansion LLC, the PTAB denied Petitioner's motion for joinder under Section 315(c). On November 8, 2013, the Petitioner filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent...more

Court Rejects Exhibit Lists and Objections That Would "Require a Judge to Shovel Through Steaming Mounds of Objections" and Orders...

As this patent infringement action headed to trial, the district court scolded both parties for their exhibit lists and, in particular, the objections to the exhibit lists. The district court explained that "Affinity has...more

Court Report - September 2014 #6

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Cadence Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. v. InnoPharma Licensing LLC et al. 1:14-cv-01225; filed September 24, 2014 in the...more

PTAB's Guidelines for Foreign Language Depositions

In the Ariosa Diagnostics v. ISIS Innovation Limited inter partes review, the PTAB set for the guidelines for taking depositions in a foreign language as required by 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(c). In addition to the requirement of...more

Specialty Surfaces Alleges Patent Infringement by Deluxe Athletics

On August 21, 2014, Pennsylvania-based Specialty Surfaces International, Inc. (“SSI”) filed a complaint against Georgia-based Deluxe Athletics, LLC (“Deluxe Athletics”) alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,976,645 (the...more

Make That First Bite A Big One

In Medtronic, Inc. v. Marital Deduction Trust, IPR2014-00695, Paper 18 (September 25, 2014), the Board denied Medtronic’s motion to join the IPR with a prior IPR 2014-00100, also involving U.S. Patent No. 5,593,417. The...more

PTAB to Apple: No Third or Fourth Bite at the Apple

In inter partes proceeding Apple Inc. v. Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute et al., IPR2014-00320, Petitioner Apple sought a second request for rehearing, before an expanded panel of the PTAB, on the Board's decision not to...more

Motion to Dismiss Granted Where Patent Claimed Unpatentable Subject Matter

Amazon.com ("Amazon") filed a motion to dismiss Tuxis Technologies, LLC's ("Tuxis") complaint for failure to state a claim. Tuxis alleged infringement of the 6,055,513 ("the '513 patent") against Amazon. As explained by the...more

Clerical Errors Forgiven

In SCHOTT Gemtron Corporation v. SSW Holdings Company, Inc., IPR2014-00367, Paper 30 (September 22, 2014), the Board forgave a clerical error that resulted in the petitioner’s expert declaration not being filed until January...more

IP Newsflash - September 2014 #4

Federal Circuit Has Jurisdiction to Decide Non-Patent Causes of Action That Involves a Substantial, Non-Hypothetical Disputed Patent Law Issue - On September 16, 2014, a Federal Circuit panel consisting of Circuit...more

Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Apple License as Defense Denied Where Apple Products Were Not Used to Satisfy Any Claim...

In this patent infringement action between Personal Audio ("Personal Audio") and Togi Entertainment, Inc. ("Togi"), the defendants filed a motion for summary judgment based on a license defense. They requested summary...more

The Board’s Disjointed View of Joinder

In Target Corporation v. Destination Maternity, IPR2014-00508, Paper 20 IPR2014-00509, Paper 19 (September 25, 2014), the Board denied the petitions as barred under 35 USC 315(b),finding that Target could not “join” its later...more

Withholding A Court's Order From the USPTO in A Co-Pending Reexamination May Render A Patent Unenforceable in Litigation

In Masimo Corporation v. Philips Electronic North America Corporation, et al., the Philips Defendants moved for leave to amend their answer to add a defense of inequitable conduct based on Masimo's alleged inequitable conduct...more

Inter Partes Review – Parties Favor Settlement Over Board Decisions

Now that we have a growing body of statistics on the Inter Partes Review proceedings created by the America Invents Act, it is interesting to see how the proceedings are being resolved. With the significant attention given to...more

IP & Technology Newsletter (Fall 2014)

The Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. vs. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (decided June 19, 2014) (“Alice”) is an important decision that will have an impact on software and computer-related inventions. In its...more

Federal Circuit Argument in Myriad Appeal Scheduled

The Federal Circuit has scheduled oral argument in Myriad Genetics' appeal of denial earlier this year by the Utah District Court of its motion for preliminary injunction against Ambry Genetics....more

Happy 2nd Birthday, Inter Partes Review – By the Numbers

Welcome to Volume 7 of our IPR-PGR Quarterly Report. We take special note of three interesting statistics this quarter. First, obtaining amended patent claims in these proceedings remains difficult. ...more

Alice in Wonderland: Are Software Inventions Still Patentable in View of the Supreme Court’s Ruling?

The Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. vs. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (decided June 19, 2014) (“Alice”) is an important decision that will have an impact on software and computer-related inventions. In...more

PTAB Provides Guidance for Meeting Burden to Show Written Description for Substitute Claim

September 24, 2014 – In a Final Written Decision finding the patentee’s claim 1 unpatentable, the PTAB denied a motion to add a substitute claim that added hundreds of words to challenged claim 1. The PTAB held that the...more

In re Lipitor Antitrust Litigation (D.N.J. 2014)

In the lastest instance of a plaintiff attempting to extend the Supreme Court's holding in FTC v. Actavis that "reverse payment" settlement agreements in ANDA litigation could be anticompetitive and violate the antitrust...more

PTAB Continues to Deny IPR Petitions, Based on Arguments Incorporated By Reference

September 22, 2014 – For the second time in a month (see our previous PTAB Highlight regarding IPR2014-00491 below), the PTAB has refused to consider arguments incorporated by reference into an IPR petition. ...more

The Power of Smell: Scent Marketing Meets the Future of Gaming and Internet Surfing

Scent marketing is as old as a real estate agent baking cookies in a house for sale and as new as Oscar Mayer’s “bacon” alarm clock. Harnessing the primal power of smell represents a new frontier of subliminal...more

Inovia Releases 2014 Report on Global Patent Trends

Patent services provider inovia has released its fifth annual report on global patent and IP trends. In compiling "The 2014 U.S. Global Patent & IP Trends Indicator," inovia, which produces products for PCT national phase...more

PTAB Permits Entry of Declaration Testimony in an IPR Without Opposing Party’s Opportunity to Cross- Exam

In a Conduct of the Proceeding Order and Decision Denying Patent Owner’s Motion for Additional Discovery, the PTAB addresses the situation of proffered declaration testimony that was not prepared for the purposes of the inter...more

3,065 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 123