News & Analysis as of

Patents Patent Applications Indefiniteness

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter - March 2022: Federal Circuit Rules on Two Means-Plus-Function/Indefinite Cases

The Federal Circuit issued two cases this week providing more clarity to when a functional claim feature should be considered a de facto means-plus-function claim that requires structural detail to meet the indefiniteness...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter - March 2022

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Newsletter - January 2022 (Chinese)

Knobbe Martens on

避而不谈可能支持否定性权利要求限定 - 在 Novartis Pharmaceuticals 诉 Accord Healthcare Inc. 一案(上诉案件编号:21- 1070)中,联邦巡回上诉法院认为,一项对药物“速效剂量”避而不谈的专利申请,为要求不存在此类剂量的否定 性权利要求限制提供了书面说明支持。 ...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Newsletter - January 2022 (Japanese)

Knobbe Martens on

記述がないことがクレームの否定的限定のサポートと解釈できる場合がある Federal Circuit は、Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare Inc. (Appeal No. 21-1070) に おいて、薬剤の「初回負荷用量」についての記述がない特許出願は、そのような用量がないことを要 求するクレームの否定的限定に記述によるサポートを提供していることになると判示した。 ...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - January 2022

Knobbe Martens on

January 2022 Federal Circuit Newsletter (Japanese) January 2022 Federal Circuit Newsletter (Chinese)  Silence May Support Negative Claim Limitation In Novartis Pharmaceuticals v. Accord Healthcare Inc. Appeal No. 21-1070, the...more

International Lawyers Network

Can Patent Claims be Held Indefinite for Failing to Disclose an Algorithm?

Suppose that you want to obtain a patent for an invention and, in your claims of the patent application, you recite terms as a structure with functional language or means-plus-function language. What if this language requires...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Consisting Essentially Of Trouble

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The Federal Circuit decision in HZNP Medicines LLC v. Horizon Pharma USA, Inc. is a good reminder that even standard “patent lingo” can cause trouble down the line. Now that the court has denied rehearing en banc (with Judges...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2019

Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB Cannot Approve or Deny Certificates of Correction - In Honeywell International, Inc. v. Arkema Inc., Arkema France, Appeal Nos. 2018-1151, -1153, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) does not have the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

“Consisting Essentially Of:” Expanding the Scope of Indefiniteness

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s determination, holding a group of patents invalid for indefiniteness. In December 2014, HZNP Medicines LLC (“Horizon”) brought suit against Actavis Laboratories UT,...more

Morgan Lewis

Federal Circuit: 2D Depiction of 3D Article Can Satisfy Written Description in a Design Patent

Morgan Lewis on

The recent ruling in In re Maatita means that a two-dimensional drawing of a three-dimensional object may meet the enablement and definiteness requirements for a design patent....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

Berkheimer v. HP Inc., Appeal No. 2017-1437 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 8, 2018) - In Berkheimer v. HP Inc., the Federal Circuit reviewed the District Court’s summary judgment finding that certain claims of a patent were invalid as...more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTO Uses Different Approaches “Configured” to Assess Indefiniteness

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a precedential decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) upheld the longstanding US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) practice of using a lower threshold to assess claim indefiniteness during prosecution relative...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Nautilus Standard Sinks Dow Patents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Dow Chemical Company (“Dow”) lost a ruling that competitor NOVA Chemical Corporation and NOVA Chemicals Inc. (collectively “NOVA”) infringed claims of two Dow patents when the Federal Circuit applied the U.S. Supreme Court’s...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

District Court Finds Enhanced Patent Indefiniteness

Foley & Lardner LLP on

I don’t usually write about district court decisions, but the patent indefiniteness ruling in Andrulis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Celgene Corp. (D. Del., July 26, 2015), caught my attention. The court held the asserted claim...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Further Guidance on Indefiniteness Following the Supreme Court's Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. Decision

The Supreme Court's decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369 (2014) appeared to raise the bar for patent clarity. However, the true effects of the decision will not be seen for some time, if ever. In...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Keeps Burden of Patent Clarity on Applicants on Issues of Patent Indefiniteness

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In In re Packard, the Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision upholding the rejection of Packard’s claims for indefiniteness. The per curiam decision approaches the issue from the...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