While Sequenom’s appeal of the district court’s summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent 6,258,540 under 35 USC § 101 has been pending at the Federal Circuit, the USPTO has been considering the validity of the patent...more
In the few weeks since I first wrote about Kyle Bass and the Coalition for Affordable Drugs he formed to challenge Orange Book-listed patents that he believes “have little value other than to drive up prescription drug...more
Neither the statutes nor the regulations governing Inter Partes Review (IPR) require the party challenging the patent to have been charged with infringement, or even to establish any interest in practicing the claimed subject...more
In affirming the decision of the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit upheld the PTAB’s use of the “broadest reasonable interpretation” of the claims in...more
Well, 2014 was a busy year in patent law, and it wasn’t all good news for patent holders. The Supreme Court made 35 USC § 101 a significant hurdle to patenting inventions across a broad swath of technologies, gave more teeth...more
1/8/2015
/ Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Interim Guidance ,
Limelight v Akamai ,
Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
In K/S HIMPP v. Hear-Wear Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that upheld the decision of the Central Reexamination Unit Examiner that refused to hold...more
In Consumer Watchdog v. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation, the Federal Circuit held that an inter partes reexamination requester must establish an injury in fact sufficient to confer Article III standing in order to appeal...more
In a decision issued on April 18, 2014, Judge Payne of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granted the USPTO’s motion to dismiss the case brought by Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC to challenge the...more
On October 15, 2013, Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia seeking review of the USPTO’s decisions denying petitions to institute inter partes review...more
On March 25, 2013, the USPTO published final rule changes to “Implement the Technical Corrections to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act as to Inter Partes Review.” The rule changes have an effective date of March 25, 2013,...more
On January 14, 2013, President Obama signed HR 6621 into law. The title of HR 6621 is “To correct and improve certain provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act,” but it also makes changes to other provisions of U.S....more
In a decision granting (in part) a Request for Inter Partes Review, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held that an infringement complaint that was dismissed without prejudice did not bar the Request for Inter...more
When the Federal Circuit denied the Request for Panel Rehearing and Rehearing en banc in In re Baxter, the court let stand its two decisions that affirmed conflicting rulings on the validity of the same patent....more