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
The Outcome of the PTAB’s Analysis May Determine Whether the PTAB Engaged in Claim Construction - In Google LLC v. Ecofactor, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1750, the Federal Circuit held that the outcome of the PTAB’s analysis of...more
PARUS HOLDINGS, INC. V. GOOGLE LLC - Before Lourie, Bryson, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: PTAB did not err in declining to consider...more
Derivation Showing Overcome by Evidence of Respondent’s Prior Conception in Rare Derivation Proceeding - The Board issued a decision in a rare derivation proceeding filed by Global Health Solutions LLC (“Petitioner”)...more
Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...more
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
In Re Google LLC - Before: Moore, Lourie, and Prost. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTO’s arguments on appeal did not reflect the record below....more
On December 8 2022, the Federal Circuit in Google LLC v. Hammond Development Int’l, Inc. affirmed in part and reversed in part the PTAB’s final written decision of an IPR holding that Google failed to prove that certain...more
GOOGLE LLC v. IPA TECHNOLOGIES INC. Before Dyk, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: For purposes of determining whether a reference was prior art, the Board has an obligation...more
In In re: Google Technology Holdings LLC, No. 2019-1828 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 13, 2020), the Federal Circuit elaborated on the policies underlying waiver and forfeiture of appellate arguments. Ultimately, the court affirmed the...more
The Federal Circuit recently addressed whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) can institute inter partes review (IPR) on a ground not advanced by the petitioner, as well as whether the general knowledge of a person...more
In an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that although the PTAB erred by instituting review based on a ground not advanced in the petition, the PTAB...more
Relying on 35 U.S.C. § 314(a), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board has articulated its reluctance to review “follow-on” petitions challenging the validity of patents that have been previously subjected to inter partes review....more
In August 2016, Google petitioned for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,552,124 (owned by IXI Mobile), asserting that claims 1–10 are unpatentable. In March 2017, the PTAB instituted the IPR as to claims 1–5, but...more
Addressing issues of obviousness in the context of an asserted teaching away, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision finding that the challenged claims were...more
A recent decision by the Federal Circuit suggests that relying on “common sense” in analyzing whether a patent is obvious in view of prior art cannot always be based on common sense alone. In a decision providing...more
All patent practitioners recognize that a single prior art reference can be used to reject claims in an obviousness rejection. However, the issue is whether the Patent Office must provide additional evidence, above and beyond...more
Inequitable Conduct Ruling Upheld - In AMERICAN CALCAR, INC. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., Appeal No. 2013-1061, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of inequitable conduct. Calcar asserted patents related to...more