United States Patent and Trademark Office Patents

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.... more +
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.    less -
News & Analysis as of

Federal Circuit Review (August 2014)

Post Grant Review of Patent Favors Stay of Litigation - In VIRTUALAGILITY INC. v. SALESFORCE.COM, INC., Appeal No. 14-1232, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's denial of a motion to stay pending a post...more

Will the USPTO Respond to Public Feedback of Its Eligibility Guidance?

Periodically, the USPTO holds open meetings with the public to discuss its thinking on current topics relating to the patent procurement process. Late last week, the Biotechnology, Chemical and Pharmaceutical Customer...more

Beware of the CIP—Parent Applications Can Be Prior Art

Companies file patent applications with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to protect promising innovations. Often, however, improvements, additional uses and refinements surface after filing a patent...more

H-W Technology, L.C. v. Overstock.com, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)

Proofread your claims before you sue! - Even obvious clerical errors in patent claims can doom your lawsuit if not corrected before suit is filed. This was evident in H-W Technology, L.C. v. Overstock.com, Inc.,...more

PTO post-grant review: Patent issuance is not end of the line

So, you find yourself a defendant in a patent infringement suit. Some patent holder has filed a lawsuit claiming that your company is infringing on their patented technology. The patent holder threatens to shut your business...more

Final office action rejecting claim sufficient to support stay pending appeal

In 2013, a jury found the four defendants liable for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,841,146 (“Reflector”). The defendants appealed to the Federal Circuit and filed for a reexamination of the patent. In the instant action,...more

Examination of Myriad-Mayo Guidance Comments -- AUTM, COGR, AAU, and APLU

On March 4, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a guidance memorandum, entitled "Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural...more

Judge Crotty denies attorney and expert fees

In a matter related to Case no. 1:13–cv-01358–PAC, Abbvie requested attorney and expert fees following the court’s determination that U.S. Patent No. 7,846,442 (“Methods of treating rheumatoid arthritis with an anti-TNF-alpha...more

Yamanaka iPSC Patent Challenged

Dr. Shinya Yamanaka of Kyoto University shared the 2012 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine with Dr. John B. Gurdon for their respective discoveries that mature, specialized cells can be reprogrammed to become immature...more

Gone but not forgotten…is the archaic ground of prior claiming relevant to “whole of contents” novelty?

This is one of two related articles on aspects of prior claiming. Prior claiming was a ground of invalidity under the Patents Act 1952 (1952 Act). It prevented grant of a patent claiming subject matter already claimed by...more

Apotex Inc. v. UCB, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)

Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of inequitable conduct in Apotex v. USB, a relatively rare occurrence in the years after the Federal Circuit's decision in Therasense v. Becton, Dickenson. In the Therasense...more

Effect On Settlement Of Post-Grant Patent Review Proceedings

The recent America Invents Act both modified and created procedures for challenging patents in proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) after they have been issued, which are called post grant...more

Inventions and the Ecosystem of Ideas

There are some striking parallels between inventions and living organisms, and between technology in a consumer marketplace and an ecosystem. Insights gained through the comparisons may be beneficial to inventors, companies,...more

Examination of Myriad-Mayo Guidance Comments -- International Bioindustry Associations

On March 4, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a guidance memorandum, entitled "Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural...more

No Patent; No Federal Jurisdiction

CamSoft Data Services, Inc. v. Southern Electronics Supply, Inc. - Addressing whether federal courts have jurisdiction over patent disputes prior to issuance of a disputed patent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...more

Public Comments to USPTO’s Preliminary Examination Instructions in View of Supreme Court Decision in Alice Case

As reported here last month, the USPTO recently issued a memorandum to the Examination Corps, entitled “Preliminary Examination Instructions in view of the Supreme Court Decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank...more

Examination of Myriad-Mayo Guidance Comments -- ACLU

On March 4, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a guidance memorandum entitled "Guidance For Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Of Claims Reciting Or Involving Laws of Nature, Natural Phenomena, & Natural...more

Voluntary and Intentional Applicant Choices are Errors Under the Reissue Statute Only if They Arise from a False or Deficient...

In re Dinsmore - Addressing the issue of whether the filing of a terminal disclaimer that rendered a patent unenforceable by the applicants was an error for the purposes of the reissue statute, the U.S. Court of...more

How to Protect a Product of Nature

"The more things change . . ." is the beginning of an old saw, and that saying has particular relevance just days after the USPTO stopped accepted comments on its Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance. After all, this isn't...more

Examiner and Board Must Be Consistent in Prior Art-Based Rejections of Similarly-Worded Claims

Q.I. Press Controls, B.V. v. Lee - Addressing the issue of whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) erred by rejecting some claims as obvious, but not...more

The Federal Circuit Reverse a Finding of Anticipation of the PTAB in Inter Partes Review

In re Rambus, Inc. - Addressing a finding of anticipation by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Statutory Right to Appeal Does Not Bypass Article III Standing Requirements

Consumer Watchdog v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the Board) on the grounds that the appellant, a...more

In re Patel (Fed Cir 2014)

The Supreme Court has made a sport of reversing the Federal Circuit over the past decade or so, and other than reserved (and sometimes not so reserved) statements by members of the lower court, the Federal Circuit has...more

The USPTO Issues Guidelines for Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis: How the Supreme Court's Decisions in Pathology v. Myriad and...

On March 4th, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a guidance advising examiners and the public of the factors for determining whether an invention satisfies the provisions of 35 U.S.C. §101, as applied...more

The USPTO Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance TRIPS Over Treaty Requirements

The “Myriad-Mayo” patent subject matter eligibility guidance issued March 4, 2014 reflects the USPTO’s interpretation of Supreme Court cases interpreting and applying 35 USC § 101 to claims involving laws of nature, natural...more

526 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 22