I have been following and writing about the ongoing legal battle between Nintendo / The Pokémon Company and PocketPair over PocketPair’s popular video game Palworld. This past week, PocketPair published a blog post addressing...more
5/14/2025
/ Damages ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Popular ,
Remedies ,
Risk Management ,
Technology Sector ,
Video Games
I have previously written extensively on the ongoing legal battle between Nintendo / The Pokémon Company (referred to herein collectively as simply "Nintendo") and PocketPair over PocketPair's popular video game Palworld....more
As reported by Quantum Insider, this past week, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) overturned an examiner's rejections of an application directed to a quantum...more
In September of last year, and in light of a corresponding Japanese patent infringement suit, I published an article detailing how The Pokémon Company had filed two patent applications at the United States Patent and...more
There has been a flurry of activity in Illinois over the last few months with regards to quantum computing. For example, the state enacted a package of bills that provides tax incentives for quantum computing development,...more
Recently, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued an opinion in Beteiro, LLC v. DraftKings Inc.[1] This case is yet another case where the Federal Circuit upheld invalidity under § 101. Here, the patents...more
As discussed previously on this blog (see "USPTO Proposed Rule Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice" and "The USPTO's Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule: A Litigator's Perspective") and elsewhere, the U.S. Patent and...more
On May 10, 2024, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced a proposed rule change to terminal disclaimer practice.Unfortunately, the proposed change appears to further weaken issued patents in which terminal disclaimers...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
As I described in the first two parts of this series, there are a number of ways in which the “on sale” bar can cost the unwitting inventor dearly. Hence, lastly, I would like to highlight some of the exceptions that can be...more
In part 1 of this series, I introduced the “on sale bar” and described how a commercial sale or offer for sale can negate patentability, according to the doctrine the Supreme Court established in Pfaff v. Wells Elecs., Inc....more
You can be denied a U.S. patent if the application you submit to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is not “new” and “non-obvious.” In determining whether something is “new” and “non-obvious,” U.S. patent examiners...more