(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
SCOTUS and federal court rulings on TTAB decisions on granting trademarks and trademark renewals; Netflix settling an anticipated defamation case with a disclaimer and donation
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Was the classic song “Over The Rainbow” plagiarized? How about a claim of copyright infringement against the script for “The Holdovers?” AI Legal strategies switch to claims of CMI removal
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
8 Key Takeaways | The Presumption of Irreparable Harm After the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020
(Podcast) The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Action on Trademark Applications Targeting Names of Public Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Action on Trademark Applications Targeting Names of Public Figures
Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Paralegal Insights: A Collaborative Trademark Practice Series 2
The term of a U.S. utility patent extends 20 years from the date of priority filing. However, the USPTO provides a guarantee of “prompt patent and trademark office response” that may allow the term to extend beyond the 20...more
In December 2021, patent practice was upended by four related United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions holding that patents subject to statutory Patent Term Adjustment...more
Last year, the Federal Circuit surprised many observers of patent law in In re Cellect LLC, 81 F.4th 1216, 1228–29 (Fed. Cir. 2023) when—for the first time—it affirmed a U.S. Patent & Trademark Office decision cancelling an...more
Under the patent laws, the term of a patent may be increased for delays by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) during the application process. See 35 U.S.C. § 154(b)(1). Conversely, the USPTO can reduce a patent term...more
What Congress has guaranteed, the courts have taken away - The Supreme Court is about to receive a Petition for Certiorari in a case that impacts how long a patent protects new inventions, we expect. Specifically, the case...more
In August 2023, the Federal Circuit in In re Cellect held that in evaluating unpatentability for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) of a patent that has received patent term adjustment (PTA), the relevant date is the...more
Hosted by American Conference Institute, the Summit on Biosimilars & Innovator Biologics returns to New York City, on June 20 - 21, 2024. Now in its 15th year, the 2024 conference will dive deep into the latest legal,...more
According to statute, if prosecution of a patent application is delayed due to the fault of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), additional term is added to the life of the patent when it issues. This is...more
The duty to disclose required by 37 CFR § 1.56 is a constant weight on patent practitioners and applicants to cite references via an Information Disclosure Statement (IDS). The indiscriminate or reflexive filing of an IDS...more
The Federal Circuit's In re Cellect decision has caused a great deal of commentary and proposals to avoid its consequences, including changing prosecution strategies and filing prospective, precautionary terminal disclaimers...more
The recent resurgence in ex parte reexamination demonstrates the importance of this post-grant review vehicle. It has become particularly important for patent challengers who may be estopped from requesting inter partes...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has just issued a Notice of Allowance for your invention embodied in the Utility Patent Application (UPA) you filed years ago. Your initial reaction may be, ‘Finally! The...more
On January 19, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an order denying the Petition for Rehearing En Banc in the much awaited In re Cellect matter. The mandate of the court issued today....more
On January 18, 2024, the USPTO rejected a "contingent" terminal disclaimer filed by Acadia Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Acadia) for a patent it owns that is being challenged in a pending litigation as invalid for obviousness-type...more
On Friday, January 19, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an Order refusing to rehear In re Cellect, LLC en banc. This likely means that the holding in In re Cellect will represent the law regarding...more
2024 is upon us and it’s going to be another busy year for intellectual property law. In this episode of IP Talk with Wolf Greenfield, you’ll hear Wolf Greenfield attorneys from a variety of practice areas offering their...more
The Federal Circuit appeal in Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V., Merck Sharp & Dohme, LLC v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. et al., concerns whether patent term extension (PTE) for regulatory delay, in particular delay for FDA drug...more
This case addresses how Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) interacts with obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). Background - Cellect sued Samsung Electronics, Co. for infringement of four patents. Subsequently, Samsung...more
The Federal Circuit recently clarified the interplay between obvious-type double patenting (ODP) and patent term adjustments (PTA) granted pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(b). In In re Cellect, the Federal Circuit explained that...more
IPR Petitioners Must Be Permitted to Respond to Claim Constructions First Proposed in Patent Owner Response - In Axonics, Inc. v. Medtronic, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1532, the Federal Circuit held that where a patent owner in...more
The Federal Circuit has ruled that when members of a patent family have different expiration dates due to patent term adjustments (PTAs), the earlier-expiring patent family members can be used as a basis for an...more
Here’s a familiar scenario. An applicant files a first patent application with medium-to-narrow claim coverage. The first patent application issues with some or substantial patent term adjustment (PTA) caused by one or more...more
Gain a comprehensive understanding of Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA essentials, a critical competency for legal and business professionals in the biopharmaceutical arena. Attend ACI’s Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Proficiency Series...more
Addressing for the first time how patent term adjustments (PTAs) interact with obviousness-type double patenting (ODP), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that when members of a patent family have...more
In re Cellect, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2022-1293, -1294, -1295, -1296 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2023) In a significant appeal from ex parte reexamination proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the Federal Circuit...more