News & Analysis as of

MBHB Snippets: Review of Developments in Intellectual Property Law: Fall 2014 - Vol. 12, Issue 4

In This Issue: - Prior Art Redefined Under the AIA - PTAB Holds a Firm Line on Additional Discovery - The Art of Prior Art Searching - Anticipating a Federal Trade Secret Law - Trademark...more

Alice was a Game-Changer: Federal Circuit Changes Course on Advertising Patent

The third time is the charm in Ultramercial v. Hulu: After twice finding that an advertising method patent was directed to patent eligible subject matter, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s third Ultramercial...more

Indefiniteness: Are You Reasonably Certain?

The indefiniteness standard has, until recently, been very high—only an “insolubly ambiguous claim” was considered indefinite (see, e.g., Honeywell Intern., Inc. v. International Trade, 341 F. 3d 1332, 1338–9 (Fed. Cir....more

IP News You Need to Know - November 2014

In This Presentation: - USPTO POST-GRANT PROCEEDINGS: LESSONS LEARNED AFTER 2 YEARS - Rationales for Denial of Petition - Rationales for Claims Surviving Final Decision - Considerations for Multi-Forum...more

IP|Trend: New Era in Protection of Software by Intellectual Property Law? [Video]

It’s been a rough couple of years for software developers seeking patent protection for their software. Decisions by the Supreme Court have limited the amount of patent protection that developers can obtain. Attorneys Seth...more

Supreme Court Told That TTAB Preclusion Raises Constitutional Concerns

As reported in our September 23 Client Alert, the Supreme Court is set to hear argument on December 2 on the issue of whether likelihood of confusion findings by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) are entitled to...more

Interval Licensing: Determining Indefiniteness Post-Nautilus

The Supreme Court’s decision in Nautilus1 is considered by many as a significant development for accused infringers asserting indefiniteness. The decision is viewed as relaxing the standard thereby making it easier for...more

Patent Definiteness Requirement Update

The Supreme Court recently “conclude[d] that the Federal Circuit’s formulation, which tolerates some ambiguous claims but not others, does not satisfy the statute’s definiteness requirement.” Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig...more

Half a year since Octane

It’s been nearly half a year since the Supreme Court, in Octane Fitness, ostensibly lowered the standard for finding a patent case to be exceptional for purposes of fee-shifting. At the time, Octane generated much commentary...more

A Sea Change after Alice: Recent Court Decisions Show Patents Are Vulnerable under Section 101 Attack

Since 2010, the Supreme Court has issued four decisions on patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In the most recent decision, Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, the Court continued the restrictive approach set forth in...more

How Have Courts Interpreted the Recent Guidance of the Supreme Court on When to Afford Attorneys’ Fees Under the Patent Act?

During the last term, the Supreme Court issued a number of opinions related to patents. One of these opinions was Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., 134 S. Ct. 1749, 188 L. Ed. 2d 816 (2014), a case dealing...more

Oral Argument In Teva Pharmaceuticals: Supreme Court To Decide Federal Circuit’s Standard Of Review Of District Court Claim...

On October 15, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (No. 13-854). The issue presented in the case is “Whether a district court’s factual finding in support of its...more

Standard for Induced Patent Infringement in Flux

Recent developments in a court case concerning induced patent infringement may have a significant impact on patent owners and patent portfolio valuations, pending review by the Supreme Court. On October 16, 2014, the...more

Who Is Alice and Why Is She Invalidating Patents?

On June 19, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, clarifying what it means to be patentable subject matter. With one stroke of the pen, the Supreme Court...more

Supreme Court Hears Arguments on Appellate Standard of Review Over Patent Claim Construction

The United States Supreme Court heard oral argument October 15, 2014, in Teva Pharm. USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., No. 13-854. (The transcript and audio recording are available here.) The question before the Court in this case...more

Supreme Court: Should Appeal Give Deference to Lower Courts on Claim Construction?

On October 15, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. v. Sandoz Inc., et al., case number 13-854. At issue is the level of deference that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

Teva v. Sandoz -- Is Deferential Review a Boon for Patent Trolls?

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. case to determine whether appellate courts should afford any deference to a trial court's claim construction...more

Guest Post: Myriad -- A Direct and Unexceptional Approach

Is there a chain of reasoning that leads to the outcome in Myriad more shortly and directly than that outlined by Justice Thomas and without invoking judicial exceptions? It is strongly arguable that this is indeed the case...more

The Supreme Court Revisits Patent Eligible Subject Matter in Alice v. CLS Bank

The Supreme Court recently addressed the question of patent eligibility under Section 101 of the Patent Act, holding a software patent in the financial services industry invalid for failing to meet the minimum requirements of...more

Teva v. Sandoz -- Supreme Court Preview

Next week, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. case to determine whether appellate courts should afford any deference to a trial court's claim construction...more

Supreme Court’s Denial of Certiorari Strengthens Intellectual Property Licensees’ Protections in Cross-Border Insolvency Cases

Chapter 15 of the Bankruptcy Code provides mechanisms for dealing with cases of cross-border insolvency. On Oct. 6, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Jaffé v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., denied review of a decision of the...more

September 2014: Patent Litigation Update

Supreme Court Raises the Bar for Establishing Induced Infringement in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies. In Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Techs, Inc., __ U.S. __, 134 S.Ct. 2111 (2014), theSupreme Court...more

Alice in Wonderland: The Ongoing Impact of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l on Computer-Implemented Inventions

On June 19, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l (Alice)[i]. In Alice, the Court held that several patents that pertained to a computerized platform for eliminating risk...more

Patent Eligibility of Software

Last year, a deeply divided set of opinions in an en banc Federal Circuit decision left doubt as to whether software programs would remain eligible for patent protection. Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court brought closure by...more

Supreme Court Preview -- Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. -- The End of Cybor Corp.?

The Supreme Court will begin its 2014-2015 term next Monday. Last year, the Court heard a record number of patent law cases, at least for recent history. Nevertheless, it is scheduled to hear another one on October 15. ...more

538 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 22