News & Analysis as of

Prior Art United States Patent and Trademark Office

Securus Technologies, Inc. v. Global Tel*Link Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

Over the last 18 months, the Federal Circuit has been quietly shoring up the non-obviousness provisions of 35 U.S.C. § 103 by enforcing the requirement that an obviousness argument entails making the full prima facie case. ...more

The United States Patent Office Totally Rejected Your Claims? Don't Panic!

by Ward and Smith, P.A. on

In my almost 17 years of practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO"), by far the most common telephone call I receive from inventors is a frantic inquiry about an Office Action received from the PTO...more

Be Careful Basing Your IPR On Previously Considered Prior Art

by Jones Day on

It is not always possible for a party seeking to challenge a patent in an IPR to find prior art patents or printed publications that the USPTO has not already considered. Often the best available prior art comes from the...more

Patent Grace Period Laws in the IP5 Patent Offices: Some Similarities But Largely Different

Life science and other high technology companies most frequently file patent applications in five IP offices (IP5), namely: the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the European Patent Office (EPO), the Japanese...more

Design Patent PTO Litigation Statistics (through February 1, 2017)

Although post-grant challenges of design patents have consistently made up a small percentage of the total number of patent challenges, these numbers have steadily increased to their highest level in 2017. The statistics...more

Why Design Patents Are Surviving Post-Grant Challenges

As of January 2017, the institution rate for Patent Trial and Appeal Board trials involving design patents was 37 percent. That is significantly lower than every other technology area and makes design patents the only...more

New Fed Circuit decision bolsters on-sale bar

by Thompson Coburn LLP on

Patent litigators will tell you that there are many ways to invalidate a patent. One of their favorites is a self-inflicted ground of invalidity known as the “on-sale bar.” Under patent law, if you sell (or offer to sell)...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies the On-Sale Bar Under the AIA: No Public Disclosure of the Invention Is Required if the Existence of the...

Under 35 U.S.C. § 102, the on-sale bar generally holds that the sale of a patented invention more than one year before the filing date invalidates the patent. Before the America Invents Act (AIA), courts held that...more

Federal Circuit Maintains Pre-AIA Interpretation of the On-Sale Bar for Public Sales

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Helsinn Healthcare S.A., v. Teva Pharm. USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit recently held that, despite changes to the statutory language of § 102 under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), the Court’s pre-AIA...more

Federal Circuit Holds That Statements Made In IPRs Can Lead To Prosecution Disclaimer

by Jones Day on

In Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 16-1599 (Fed. Cir. May 11, 2017) (“Federal Circuit Op.”), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that Apple did not infringe Aylus’s patents. See Aylus Networks,...more

A Sale is Still a Sale under the AIA

At least so far, the meaning of “on sale” under AIA 35 U.S.C. §102(a)(1) has not changed from pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. §102(b) following a decision by the Federal Circuit in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.,...more

2017 PTAB Digest: The Latest Trends and Developments in Post-Grant Proceedings

by Morgan Lewis on

Recent patent reform legislation, rule changes, and court rulings are expected to have a significant impact on the strategies of both patent owners and petitioners. Please see full Digest Report below for more information....more

In re Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

Acting as Lexicographers Saves Patent from Being Found Invalid - In a recent Federal Circuit decision, the Court highlighted an old rule in that the inventors may act as their own lexicographers to create a claim term and...more

Novartis’ Gilenya Patent Invalidated as Obvious

by Knobbe Martens on

On April 12, 2017, the Federal Circuit affirmed the determination by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,324,283 (“the ’283 patent”) were...more

Rules and Practice Tips Regarding Official Notice at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office

What is Official Notice? - MPEP §2103(VI) states that when a rejection is imposed, the “Office action should clearly communicate the findings, conclusions and reasons which support them.” Examiners commonly satisfy this...more

Novartis AG v. Noven Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

In inter partes review proceedings, is the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board required to take into account a final district court determination of non-obviousness of the same claims based on the...more

AliceStorm Update February 2017

by Fenwick & West LLP on

As many of my readers noticed, I didn't publish any of my own blogs in January and February. As it turned out, I suffered from a peculiar form of seasonal affective disorder (SAD), what I would call SMIAD: Subject Matter...more

Secure Axcess, LLC v. PNC Bank National Association (Fed. Cir. 2017)

Federal Circuit Finds That USPTO Board Interpreted CBM Statute Too Broadly - In an appeal of a Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review, the Federal Circuit overturned a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark...more

Do I Need a Patent Prior Art Search?

This is a common question among many new inventors. To be patentable, an invention must be novel and non-obvious in view of the “prior art.” Prior art includes prior filed patents, patent applications, and other public...more

PTAB Provides A Possible Roadmap For Patent Owners To Successfully Argue Secondary Considerations Of Nonobvious

For just the third time ever, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB” or the “Board”) recently sided with a Patent Owner in an inter partes review (“IPR”) to find that evidence of secondary considerations of...more

In re Schweickert (Fed. Cir. 2017)

USPTO's Conclusion of Obviousness Rendered Primary Reference Unsatisfactory for Intended Purpose - In a nonprecedential opinion, the Federal Circuit vacated a decision by the Board and remanded the case on appeal from...more

How to Search Like an Examiner With the Scientific and Technical Information Center

The latest trend in patent examiner prior art searches is pushing examiners to use the Scientific and Technical Information Center (STIC) Program to use more foreign patents and foreign non-patent literature during patent...more

Factual Dispute Defeats Summary Judgment on Inherent Anticipation

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing inherent anticipation and inequitable conduct issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a summary judgment of inherent anticipation, finding that material facts remained in dispute, and...more

PTAB Obviousness Decision Must Provide “Reasoned Explanation” For Motivation To Combine References

by Brooks Kushman P.C. on

In a recent pair of decisions, the Federal Circuit has tightened the procedural and substantive requirements for Board decisions on obviousness. In Nuvasive, the Federal Circuit vacated a PTAB final decision that challenged...more

A Long Road Ahead: A Solo Entrepreneur's Perspective on the USPTO’s Roundtable I - Subject Matter Eligibility Guidelines

by Fenwick & West LLP on

I am a solo entrepreneur. After twenty plus years in industry, I decided to take the risk and start my own business using my own capital. In the parlance of the law I am considered, almost affectionately, a micro-entity. ...more

148 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 6
Cybersecurity

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.