4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | Corporate Perspectives on Intellectual Property
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - U.S. State Data Privacy Update
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Celanese International Corporation, Celanese (Malta) Company 2 Limited, and Celanese Sales U.S. Ltd. (collectively, “Celanese”) filed a petition before the United States International Trade Commission (the “ITC”), alleging...more
Speck v. Bates, No. 2023-1147 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2024) addressed two issues, (1) whether courts should apply a one-way test or a two-way test to determine if pre-critical claims materially differ from post-critical claims,...more
The Federal Circuit recently affirmed an ITC holding that the AIA’s § 102 on-sale bar applies to the sale of a product made according to a secret process when that sale occurs more than one year before the patent’s effective...more
Specify the Steps of Information Manipulation or Lose under § 101 - In Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd. Appeal No. 22-2216, the Federal Circuit held that patent claims that merely recite result-orientated, functional...more
In Pfizer Inc., v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., SK Chems Co. Ltd., v. Vidal, 2019-1871 (March 5, 2024), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s conclusions that claims 1–45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 were unpatentable due to...more
Celanese Int'l Corp. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, No. 2022-1827, 2024 WL 3747277, at *1 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2024) - Manufacturers beware! Your sales of products based on secret manufacturing processes may invalidate your...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the International Trade Commission’s (ITC) determination that the asserted process patents were invalid under the America Invents Act (AIA) because products made using...more
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN LIFE SCIENCES - Life sciences companies are forming AI-driven strategic collaborations with tech giants, creating synergy that promises to revolutionize the industry. Companies like NVIDIA,...more
In Celanese Int’l Corp. v. ITC, the Federal Circuit addressed whether the America Invents Act (“AIA”) changed the on-sale bar such that the sale of a product made using a secret process would no longer invalidate later-sought...more
CELANESE INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION v. ITC - Before Reyna, Mayer, and Cunningham. Appeal from the International Trade Commission. Summary: Process patent claims are invalid under the on-sale bar (35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)) when...more
On August 12, 2024, the Federal Circuit published its decision in Celanese International Corp. et al. v. International Trade Commission. The Federal Circuit concluded that, under the America Invents Act (AIA), patent claims...more
In Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Tech. Int’l Ltd., issued July 31, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“the AIA”) public disclosure exception to prior art, 35 U.S.C....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision that a private sale of a product embodying the claimed invention did not qualify as a “public disclosure” under 35 U.S.C. §...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. BACKERTOP LICENSING LLC [OPINION] (23-2367, 23-2368, 24-1016, 24-1017 Prost, Hughes, and Stoll) - Hughes, J. The Court affirmed the District Court’s orders (1)...more
The PTAB recently updated its Standard Operating Procedure 1 (SOP), which describes the process and guidelines for assigning judges to panels in all jurisdictions of the Board. This blog post highlights some of the key...more
One way that reexamination advantageously differs from other administrative post-grant review processes is the absence of word or page counts as a limiting factor in presenting the challenge, here substantial new questions of...more
Venable has offered general thoughts on the potential fallout from the Supreme Court's reversal of the long-standing Chevron deference, as well as practice area-specific analysis. Here, the Intellectual Property Litigation...more
On May 6th, 2024, the PTAB declined Ubiquiti Inc.’s (“Petitioner’s”) request to institute inter partes review. Ubiquiti Inc. v. XR Communications LLC D/B/A Vivato Tech., IPR2024-00148, Paper 12 (May 6, 2024). The PTAB...more
Court Orders Delisting of Patents from Orange Book and Denies Motion to Dismiss Antitrust Counterclaims for Improper Orange Book Listings. On June 10, Judge Stanley Chesler of the District of New Jersey entered judgment on...more
As an essential component of the drug development process, human clinical trials assist in determining whether a given drug will serve its intended purpose, but patent applicants should consider disclosure of such trials in...more
The NPRM proposals align with interim guidance on requesting director review for key AIA trial decisions. Following the Arthrex v. Smith & Nephew ruling, director review by the USPTO Director remains crucial for addressing...more
The PTO has issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding who may represent parties in PTAB post-grant trials. The proposal is part of the USPTO’s wider initiative to expand access to practice before the Office. ...more
Inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs) are proceedings in front of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that allow a petitioner to challenge a patent’s validity and a patent owner to defend that...more
On April 30, the USPTO announced a Request for Comments (RFC) seeking public feedback on how AI could affect USPTO evaluations on patentability, including what qualifies as prior art and the assessment of the level of...more
On April 16, 2024, the PTAB proposed new rules (“proposed rules”) governing the Director Review process, which would remain consistent with the Interim review process currently in place, and codify those procedures....more