News & Analysis as of September 26, 2024

Supreme Court of the United States › Patent Ownership

+ Follow

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term. The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -

Cancer Drugs: Strategies For Patenting Antibody-Drug Conjugate Inventions

Foley & Lardner LLP on 4/30/2024

Antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) is a promising class of cancer treatments with accelerating U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and rapidly growing market size as discussed in previous articles in this series. This...more

Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Patent Claims Directed to a Graphical User Interface as Ineligible Subject Matter Under 35...

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 1/26/2024

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of patent claims directed to a graphical user interface that seeks to enhance how search results are displayed to a user. The court agreed that the claims are...more

District Court Dismissed Claim Directed to Natural Speech Processing in a Vehicle-Mounted System as Patent Ineligible

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 11/22/2023

The Eastern District of Virginia recently dismissed a patent infringement claim, holding that the asserted claim directed to natural speech processing is patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, because it fails the Alice...more

What Patent Bills Would Mean for Infringement Litigation

Farella Braun + Martel LLP on 9/7/2023

Two bills recently introduced in Congress could significantly affect the current patent litigation landscape. The bipartisan bills are titled the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023 and the Promoting and Respecting...more

Is DOE Now In Vogue?

MoFo Life Sciences on 4/21/2023

On March 27, 2023, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, a closely watched case on the issue of enablement under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a). Though not the main point of contention, the doctrine of...more

No Standing to Appeal IPR Decision on Claim Canceled in Reexamination

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP on 9/15/2022

On August 26, in Best Medical International, Inc. v. Elekta Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a patent owner lacked standing to appeal an inter partes review (IPR) decision as to a claim the patent owner had previously...more

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on 3/24/2022

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more

Is the PTAB Unconstitutionally Biased?

Weintraub Tobin on 11/29/2021

In Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, (Fed. Cir. 2021), the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals addressed challenges to the constitutionality of the structure of the Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and...more

IPR>>IRL - A brief guide to the essentials of inter partes reviews in real life. Post-Grant Patent Law Practice

Perkins Coie on 4/28/2021

In 2011, Congress passed the America Invents Act, which replaced the inter partes reexamination process with inter partes review (IPR). The IPR procedure was intended to streamline disputes by, among other things, shortening...more

American Axle v. Neapco

Ladas & Parry LLP on 2/5/2021

On July 31, 2020, in American Axle v. Neapco, the Federal Circuit split 6-6 on the question of whether to grant en banc review of a panel decision on patent eligibility seen by many as an unwarranted extension of the...more

U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear Another Section 101 Case

Holland & Knight LLP on 11/19/2020

Those waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on Section 101 were, once again, disappointed this week. On Nov. 16, 2020, in the case of WhitServe LLC v. Donuts Inc. et al., case no. 20-325 (U.S. Supreme Court), the...more

MBHB Snippets: A review of developments in Intellectual Property Law - Volume 17, Issue 3

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 12/30/2019

2019 Patent Trial and Appeal Board Key Practice Updates: A Year in Review - 2019 has been an active year for procedural changes in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). These changes include not only the PTAB’s...more

Return Mail Inc. v. United States Postal Service

Ladas & Parry LLP on 9/23/2019

On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court held that government entities could not be considered “persons” entitled to challenge patents owned by others before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: Oil States Energy Servs., LLC v. Green’s...

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on 3/19/2019

In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the Supreme Court ruled that inter partes reviews (IPRs) do not improperly divest the courts of their judicial authority and do not violate the Seventh...more

Winner’s Playbook: Behind The Scenes Of The SAS Case

Jones Day on 6/18/2018

On April 24, 2018, in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, a closely divided U.S. Supreme Court fundamentally changed the way that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board confronts inter partes reviews under the America Invents Act. The...more

Chief Judge Guidance: SAS Impact, Motions to Amend, and Claim Construction

Jones Day on 6/11/2018

On June 5, 2018, Chief Judge David Ruschke and Vice Chief Judge Tim Fink of the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) participated in a webinar providing new guidance on three topics: (1) the new claim construction standard...more

Review of All Claims in Petition for Inter Partes Review Required after SAS Institute

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP on 5/9/2018

On the same day that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of inter partes reviews, it ruled in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu that the United States Patent and Trademark Office wrongly implemented regulations allowing...more

Patent System after Oil States and SAS – What’s the future?

Foley & Lardner LLP on 5/7/2018

On April 24th, the Supreme Court decided two important cases related to the United States Patent & Trademark Office’s inter partes review (IPR) proceedings for reconsidering the prior grant of a patent – Oil States Energy...more

[Webinar] Supreme Court Issues Decisions in Oil States and SAS Cases: A Discussion of the Impact on Patent Law and Inter Partes...

BakerHostetler on 5/1/2018

This timely and fast-moving webinar provides insight for business leaders and legal counsel on the recently issued Supreme Court decisions in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC and SAS Institute...more

Stayin' alive: What’s next for IPRs after Oil States and SAS

Eversheds Sutherland (US) LLP on 4/30/2018

On April 24, 2018, the US Supreme Court decided two important cases that directly impact inter partes reviews (IPRs) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and patent litigation as a whole. In Oil States Energy...more

SCOTUS Upholds IPRs as Constitutional, May Leave Opening for Challenges to Certain IPRs

Fenwick & West LLP on 4/27/2018

Is inter partes review of a patent grant compatible with Article III and the Seventh Amendment? That was the question presented in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group, and the U.S. Supreme Court this week...more

How the U.S. Supreme Court Ruled on Inter Partes Review and What It Means for Future Patent Challenges

Parker Poe Adams & Bernstein LLP on 4/26/2018

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday on two closely monitored cases impacting how patents could be challenged. In the more high-profile case, the court upheld the constitutionality of the inter partes review (IPR) process...more

Supreme Court: Patent Office Retains IPR Authority, Loses Discretion to Streamline Proceedings

Stoel Rives LLP on 4/25/2018

Today (April 24, 2018), the U.S. Supreme Court released two important decisions regarding the authority of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) to conduct Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) proceedings. IPRs, an...more

Supreme Court Strikes Down PTAB Partial Institution Practice: If PTAB Institutes IPR, It Must Address All Challenged Claims in Any...

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on 4/25/2018

The Supreme Court has ruled by a narrow majority of 5-4 that the Patent Office’s regulation allowing for partial institution decisions in inter partes review is foreclosed by the text of 35 U.S.C. § 318(a). SAS Institute Inc....more

U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of Patent Inter Partes Review

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on 4/25/2018

On Tuesday, April 24, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two highly anticipated decisions that significantly impact inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The Supreme Court's...more

34 Results

View per page

Page: of 2

Supreme Court of the United States › Patent Ownership

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"