News & Analysis as of

Patents Prior Art Standard of Review

Haug Partners LLP

Teaching Away and No Reasonable Expectation of Success Arguments Insufficient to Avoid Obviousness Affirmance by the Federal...

Haug Partners LLP on

In Trustees of Columbia University v. Illumina, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) decision to invalidate five patents owned by Columbia,...more

Knobbe Martens

Arctic Cat Inc. v. GEP Power Products, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Reyna, Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Where the preamble of a claim merely identifies an intended use and does not impose a structural...more

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

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. Synvina...

DuPont petitioned for inter partes review of Synvina’s patent, which was directed to a method of oxidizing a chemical using a specific temperature range, pressure range, catalyst, and solvent. The prior art disclosed the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Holding of No Interference in Fact in CRISPR Interference, Leaving Both Sides Free to License Their...

On September 10, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determining that there was no interference in fact between the University of California’s (“UC”) U.S. Patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Reyna, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board must consider arguments in an IPR petitioner’s reply, where the arguments expressly follow...more

Jones Day

Not So Secondary: Overcoming Obviousness With Objective Indicia

Jones Day on

On April 2, 2018, the PTAB issued a final written decision in Fox Factory finding that the petitioner failed to carry its burden in showing the instituted claims were unpatentable as obvious. Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC,...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - March 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Distribution Agreements Can Constitute Offers for Sale Under Section 102(b) - In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, 2014-1504, the Federal Circuit held that a distribution agreement qualified as...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

Oracle America, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2017-1118, -1202 (Fed. Cir. 2018) - In an appeal from a jury trial, the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court’s decision denying Oracle’s motion for JMOL and remanded...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Establishing Obviousness: A Fundamental Case of Evidence Over Arguments

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inter partes review decision declaring various claims of patent owner Thales’ U.S. Patent No. 6,474,159 (“the ‘159 patent”) nonobvious. In doing so, the Federal...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - January 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Where Parties Raise an Actual Dispute Regarding Claim Scope, the Court Must Resolve It In Nobelbiz, Inc. v. Global Connect, L.L.C., Appeal Nos. 2016-1104, 2016-1105, the Federal Circuit held that where parties raise an actual...more

Dechert LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies the “Reasonable Expectation of Success” Required in Hatch-Waxman Obviousness Challenges

Dechert LLP on

The U.S. Federal Circuit recently clarified the standard that patent challengers must satisfy when attempting to invalidate patented inventions directed to new uses for known drugs. Although designated as a nonprecedential...more

Knobbe Martens

Microsoft Corporation v. Biscotti, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, O’Malley, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Anticipation is not proven by multiple, distinct teachings in a single prior art document that a...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2017

Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | February 2017

Knobbe Martens on

“Common Sense” Alone Is Not a Sufficient Motivation to Combine References - In In Re: Van Os, Appeal No. 2015-1975, the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s reliance on intuition or common sense...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Tygacil Formulation Patent

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Apotex, Inc. v. Wyeth LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding that Apotex had failed to show that claims directed to a specific formulation of tigecycline...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Aqua Products, Inc. -- CAFC Grants Rehearing En Banc to Consider PTAB Motions to Amend

On Friday, August 13, 2016, the Federal Circuit granted a petition for rehearing en banc filed in the In re Aqua Products, Inc. case to consider two questions related to the PTAB's treatment of Motions to Amend in IPR...more

Morris James LLP

Objections To Magistrate’s Order Regarding Daubert And Anticipation Are Reviewed

Morris James LLP on

W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. v. C.R. Bard, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 11-515 -LPS, November 24, 2015. Stark, C.J. The court rules on objections to Magistrate’s rulings on a Daubert motion and a Report and Recommendation on...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | August 2015

Knobbe Martens on

Online Banking Patents Based On “Abstract Ideas” Held Patent Ineligible Under Alice - In Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital One Bank (USA), NA, Appeal No. 2014-1506, the Federal Circuit held that claims directed to...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Federal Circuit Clarifies Standard for Prior Art in Obviousness Analysis

Earlier this week, the Federal Circuit in Circuit Check Inc. v. QXQ, Inc. clarified the standard by which a reference may be considered prior art for the purposes of an obviousness determination. See No. 2015-1155, Slip. Op....more

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

Design Patent Case Digest: Simmons Bedding Company v. Sealy Technology LLC

Decision Date: March 31, 2015 - Court: U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Patents: D622,531 - Holding: Examiner’s decision in reexamination proceeding not to adopt Requester’s obviousness rejections REVERSED...more

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

Federal Circuit Finds CBM Eligibility Reviewable on Appeal

The Federal Circuit yesterday issued a precedential opinion in Versata Development Group v. SAP America, Inc., Appeal No. 2014-1194 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 9, 2015), finding the claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In addition to...more

21 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