The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed an obviousness decision by the Patent Trial & Appeal Board, explaining that nothing requires a petitioner to identify a prior art reference as a “primary reference” in...more
American National Manufacturing Inc. v. Sleep Number Corporation, Appeal Nos. 2021-1321, -1323, -1379, -1382 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2022) - In an appeal from inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
In a recent opinion by the Federal Circuit, Auris Health, Inc. v Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Case 2021-1732, the panel split on the weight of general industry skepticism in an obviousness analysis and split on...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
In Trustees of Columbia University v. Illumina, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) decision to invalidate five patents owned by Columbia,...more
Since yesterday was the Super Bowl, we assume that all of our readers spent today as we did, thinking about the Federal Circuit's recent decision in M&K Holdings about a video compression patent. If not, we've got you...more
Last month’s newsletter discussed Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corp, where patent owner Alacritech appealed a final written decision (FWD) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) for inter partes review (IPR)...more
The Federal Circuit recently applied well-established principles of obviousness in affirming the Patent Trial and Appeals Board's invalidation of several patents related to antifungal formulations in Anacor Pharmaceuticals,...more
As we demonstrated in our own successful appeal, Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016), a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) may fail when an expert declaration lacks detailed explanation. An expert’s...more
In Alacritech, Inc. v. Intel Corp, Judge Stoll held that under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) “[the Federal Circuit’s] review of a patentability determination is confined to ‘the grounds upon which the Board actually...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1763 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2020) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit modified and re-issued its...more
Henny Penny petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Frymaster’s U.S. Patent 8,497,691. The ’691 patent relates to deep fryers and describes a system for measuring the state of cooking oil degradation with a “total polar...more
THE CHAMBERLAIN GROUP, INC. v. ONE WORLD TECHNOLOGIES, INC. Before Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: New arguments may be raised during PTAB oral hearings so long as they...more
In a recent precedential decision, TQ Delta, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a pair of USPTO inter partes review proceedings that invalidated all claims of two related U.S. patents because “the...more
GAME AND TECH. CO., LTD. v. WARGAMING GROUP LTD. Before Dyk, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board, applying Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, must independently determine whether...more
A panel of the Federal Circuit recently sounded off with something less than the usual deferential tone regarding review under the substantial evidence standard of factual findings on patentability made by the Patent Trial...more
Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more
Assertions of obviousness based on prior art references in combination with “routine optimization” by one skilled in the art are common in the chemical and biological fields. The Federal Circuit recently addressed this issue...more
The Board’s Final Written Decision Must Address All Grounds for Unpatentability Raised in a Petition for Inter Partes Review - In Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2018-1180, 2018-1181, the Federal Circuit held that...more
In reviewing a final written decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that an unsupported opinion is not sufficient to constitute substantial evidence for...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Prost, Newman, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: An unsupported expert opinion does not constitute substantial evidence to contradict a prior art...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party may not be time-barred from instituting an IPR despite having a business relationship with a...more
In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...more
Where Parties Raise an Actual Dispute Regarding Claim Scope, the Court Must Resolve It In Nobelbiz, Inc. v. Global Connect, L.L.C., Appeal Nos. 2016-1104, 2016-1105, the Federal Circuit held that where parties raise an actual...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, O’Malley, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Anticipation is not proven by multiple, distinct teachings in a single prior art document that a...more