The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued its most recent precedential decision on satisfying the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement at the International Trade Commission in Zircon...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued its most recent precedential decision on patent assignments and satisfying the “domestic industry” requirement at the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) in...more
The Federal Circuit provided its latest guidance with respect to prosecution disclaimer in K-fee System GMBH v. Nespresso USA, Inc., 2023 WL 8882383, — F.4th — (Fed. Cir. Dec. 26, 2023). K-fee involved patents covering...more
On June 20, 2023, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a decision in favor of Haug Partners client Sartorius BioAnalytical Instruments, Inc. (Gator Bio, Inc. v. Sartorius BioAnalytical Instruments, Inc., IPR2023-00215...more
OVERVIEW -
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed three Inter Partes Review (IPR) final written decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) where the Board...more
On September 7, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Arendi S.A.R.L v. LG Electronics, Inc., offering an important reminder to patent litigators of the necessity of following the...more
In a 2-1 opinion,1 the Federal Circuit recently reversed a decision from the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin finding Defendant Leader Accessories LLC (“Leader”) and its attorney, Mr....more
In Centripetal Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated a $2.75 billion judgment against Cisco, finding that the district court judge failed to cure a conflict of interest by putting his wife’s Cisco...more
In DBN Holding, Inc. v. ITC, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) upheld a $6.2M civil penalty levied against DBN, an ITC respondent, for violating a remedial consent order, even though the patent upon which...more
In Novartis Pharms. Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., No. 21-1070, slip op. at 7 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2022), the defendant posed two distinct written-description challenges to Novartis’s patent claims, regarding (1) a daily...more
As the world marched forward in the face of the lingering covid-19 global pandemic, the Supreme Court and Federal Circuit followed suit, issuing several noteworthy decisions of which patent litigators should be aware in 2022....more
12/31/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Assignor Estoppel ,
Induced Infringement ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pleading Standards ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO
Last week, for the second time in two years, members of the House of Representatives proposed legislation limiting the ability of certain entities to file complaints for unfair trade practices at the U.S. International Trade...more
On June 29, 2021, the Supreme Court in a 5-4 decision retained the doctrine of assignor estoppel. However, the Court also held that “the Federal Circuit has applied the doctrine too expansively.” Accordingly, the Supreme...more
On February 22, 2021, the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time whether collateral estoppel (i.e., issue preclusion) was applicable in inter partes reexamination proceedings. The case is SynQor, Inc. v. Vicor Corp.,...more
On September 24, 2020 the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Network-1 Tech., Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co., in which the Federal Circuit addressed whether statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e) applies to a party who...more