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
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
USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions in 2021 show that antedating a prior-art reference remains a viable option to knock out a ground in an inter partes review (IPR) petition—patent owners were successful in...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
VALVE CORPORATION v. IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD. Before Newman, Lourie, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: For purposes of authenticating a prior art reference in IPR proceedings, the Board...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeal No. 2019-1169, -1260 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020) - Our case of the week concerns issues particular to inter partes review...more
In a series of IPR proceedings between Petitioner Adobe Inc. and Patent Owner RAH Color Technologies LLC, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declined to extend attorney work product protection to deposition questions seeking...more
In inter partes review (IPR) proceedings of patents relating to printer technology, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) granted Patent Owner’s motion to compel testimony over Petitioner’s arguments that the information...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determination that the patent owner could not establish an earlier date of invention based on evidence originating from the...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
KOLCRAFT ENTERPRISES, INC. V. GRACO CHILDREN’S PRODUCTS, INC. Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen. Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Inventor testimony of prior conception must be independently...more
Shortly before the evidentiary hearing, ALJ Lord granted Complainant’s motion in limine and excluded certain testimony in the witness statement of Respondents’ expert as precluded by her ground rules governing expert...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. KG v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1777 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2019) - In a sternly-worded decision this week, the Federal Circuit held claims to...more
On September 22, 2017, the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision regarding claims directed to a switching regulator comprising a power switch and a control circuit. The PTAB found...more
In EmeraChem v Volkswagen the Circuit reverses a determination of obviousness because the ?Board did not provide the patentee with an adequate opportunity to address a prior art reference ?that formed a principal basis for...more
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
In a decision to institute post-grant review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) clarified the importance of corroboration to establish the credibility of testimony relating to prior public use in a post grant...more