On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that could dramatically impact prosecution practices, especially for those...more
5/20/2024
/ Double Patent ,
Life Sciences ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applicants ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Proposed Rules ,
Public Comment ,
Terminal Disclaimer ,
USPTO
It is difficult to think of a case that has had more influence on patent practice than KSR v. Teleflex (550 U.S. 398 (2007)). In KSR, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the established practice that an invention could not be...more
7/22/2020
/ Appeals ,
Defense Strategies ,
Evidence ,
Litigation Strategies ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
In Phigenix v. ImmunoGen, Appeal No. 16-1544 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 9, 2017), a precedential decision, the Federal Circuit found that the petitioner lacked standing to appeal the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written...more
1/12/2017
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
Burden of Production ,
Dismissals ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Standing