Building a Cost-Effective Global Patent Portfolio Using the Netherlands
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Conflicting Application in China’s Patent System
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
The Patent Process | Interview with Patent Attorney, Robert Greenspoon
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Nonpublication Requests For Patent Applications: Disadvantages
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
Is The Deck Stacked Against Patent Owners In The PTAB?
What the First-to-File Patent Change Means (And What IP Strategists Should Do About It)
Recently, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB decision finding that a private sale of a product did not constitute a public disclosure by the inventor of the product. The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act provides exceptions...more
In a recent decision, the PTAB determined that images of products offered for sale via online retailers, such as Amazon, did not alone qualify as printed publications—even if the images showed the product and the date it was...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarified that a technical expert does not need to have been a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) at the time of the invention. Instead, they may rely on...more
Before Reyna, Prost, and Schall. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Claims are patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 where the written description discloses...more
In Pfizer Inc., v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., SK Chems Co. Ltd., v. Vidal, 2019-1871 (March 5, 2024), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s conclusions that claims 1–45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 were unpatentable due to...more
In Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technology International Limited, Inc, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision finding obvious all challenged claims of the ‘429 patent, which relates to a device that provides ports for...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - SANHO CORP. v. KAIJET TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, INC. [OPINION] (2023-1336, 7/31/24) (Dyk, Clevenger, Stoll) - Dyk, J. The Court affirmed the Board’s decision...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of an inter partes review petition because a prior art patent figure did not provide exact dimensions, and therefore could not meet the relevant claim limitation. On...more
The Federal Circuit in Voice Tech Corp. v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 2022-2163 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2024) (Lourie, Chen, and Cunningham), affirmed the PTAB’s determination that claims of Voice Tech Corp.’s (“Voice Tech”) U.S....more
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN LIFE SCIENCES - Life sciences companies are forming AI-driven strategic collaborations with tech giants, creating synergy that promises to revolutionize the industry. Companies like NVIDIA,...more
In Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Tech. Int’l Ltd., issued July 31, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“the AIA”) public disclosure exception to prior art, 35 U.S.C....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision that a private sale of a product embodying the claimed invention did not qualify as a “public disclosure” under 35 U.S.C. §...more
Addressing forfeiture of issues on appeal and sufficiency of the asserted prior art, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness finding, explaining that a party does not...more
A private sale may start an inventor’s one-year filing clock, but it likely won’t save a patentee from an intervening prior art reference. On July 31, 2024, in a precedential decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more
Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technology International Limited Inc., Appeal No. 2023-1336 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit held that the private but non-confidential sale of thousands of...more
In Natera, Inc v. Neogenomics Laboratories, Inc., Appeal No. 24-1324 the Federal Circuit held that preliminary injunction may be valid if a substantial question of invalidity was not raised, even if the asserted patent is...more
On July 9, 2024, Director Vidal reversed and remanded a denial of institution of inter partes review (IPR) relating to three Spin Master patents. See Prime Time Toys LLC v. Spin Master, Inc., IPR Nos. 2023-01339, 2023-01348,...more
Before Dyk, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: An invention is not “publicly disclosed” under 35 USC 102(b)(2)(B) by the inventor’s private sale, even though a private sale may...more
In ZyXEL, the petitioner unexpectedly received a second chance to argue against the patentability of the patentee’s substitute claims, even though the U.S. Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) had already found those claims...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the grant of a preliminary injunction (PI) in the biopharmaceutical space, concluding that the plaintiff satisfied the requirements for injunctive relief, including...more
The Situation: Even after the introduction of the European Unitary Patent Court, Germany remains a key battleground in major patent litigations. In the bifurcated German litigation system, nullity cases are heard before the...more
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is changing how practitioners prepare and submit documents. The USPTO’s recent Guidance on Use of...more
The explosion of artificial intelligence has raised some challenging questions in patent law, particularly with prior art, or the body of knowledge available prior to the filing of patent application. Two of the most...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied institution of an inter partes review, in part because the petitioner failed to show that a key reference qualified as prior art. The PTAB ruled that the petitioner was required to...more
On April 3, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of rulemaking setting out the fees that it proposes for the fiscal year starting on September 29, 2024. Although the proposed fees are...more