The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness determination, explaining that inter partes review (IPR) statutory provisions that prohibit an otherwise time-barred party...more
Addressing a matter of first impression concerning the scope of prior art relevant to a design patent infringement analysis, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that “to qualify as comparison prior art,...more
9/28/2023
/ Appeals ,
Article of Manufacture ,
Claim Construction ,
Design Patent ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board denying a motion to amend claims during an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, explaining that a claim amendment is...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision invalidating a patent, finding that the Board erred in assessing nexus and weight to be accorded to objective...more
In a case involving sua sponte review, the Director of the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) vacated an inter partes review (IPR) decision denying institution, found that the Patent Trial & Appeal Board had statutory...more
5/18/2023
/ 35 U.S.C. § 311(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Section 101 ,
USPTO
The US Patent & Trademark Office Director affirmed and designated as precedential a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision denying institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition where the expert declaration...more
KEY TAKEAWAYS AND OUTLOOK FOR 2022 -
Tracking with this era’s continuation and uncertainty trends―global supply chain disruption, innovation outpacing legislation, the unstoppable internet of [all the] things (IoT)―2022 is...more
2/18/2022
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
EU ,
Final Written Decisions ,
FRAND ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Section 101 ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
USPTO ,
Venue
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that while it did not have jurisdiction to consider the direct appeal of a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision denying institution, it could review the decision under...more
The Supreme Court of the United States agreed to consider whether Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) judges are unconstitutionally appointed. The United States of America v. Arthrex, Inc., Case Nos. 19-1452, -1458, -1459...more
10/22/2020
/ 5 U.S.C. § 7513(a) ,
Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Director of the USPTO ,
Inferior Officers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Polaris Innovations Ltd v Kingston Technology Co ,
Principle Officers ,
SCOTUS ,
Severability Doctrine ,
Tenure ,
United States v Arthrex Inc
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the Federal Reserve Banks of several cities are “persons” under the America Invents Act (AIA) and therefore may petition for post-issuance review under the AIA....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) non-obviousness determination because substantial evidence supported the PTAB’s finding that a person of skill in the art would...more
In the first-ever final written decision in a post-American Invents Act (AIA) derivation proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) found that the petitioner had not shown that an inventor named in the respondent’s...more
In August 2018, the US Patent and Trademark Office issued its first major update to the America Invents Act Trial Practice Guide (Updated TPG) since its publication in August 2012, providing additional guidance about trial...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding that tribal immunity does not apply to inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe v. Mylan...more
While reversing a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that confirmed the validity of a patent, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a post-grant review (PGR) petitioner has Article III standing...more
In a matter of first impression, the Patent and Trial Appeal Board (PTAB) denied a Native American tribe’s motion to terminate a finding that tribal sovereign immunity does not apply to inter partes review (IPR) proceedings....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision, finding that the PTAB did not need to explicitly construe a claim term. HTC Corp. v. Cellular Communications Equipment,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) decision finding claims invalid as obvious, but did not directly address the PTAB’s determination that joinder was...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision, rendered in the context of a patent interference contest, resolving priority of invention to a hepatitis C treatment on...more