News & Analysis as of

Alice/Mayo Post-Grant Review Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Knobbe Martens

Litigation Update | March 2026

Knobbe Martens on

Neither the fact that a damages expert’s testimony could have been presented more clearly, nor the fact that the methodology could be subject to reasonable disagreement, is a basis to exclude the expert’s testimony....more

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

Avoiding the “Atomic Bomb of Patent Law”

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit once called the remedy for inequitable conduct “the atomic bomb of patent law.” Inequitable conduct is a defense against patent infringement that can render a patent...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

91%: That is the Rate at Which the PTAB Affirms Examiner Section 101 Rejections

Over the last two years, we have studied the examiner affirmance rates of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for § 101 rejections.  The PTAB is the administrative court of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Something New: PTAB Tackles Section 101 Patent Eligibility

Holland & Knight LLP on

It's not often that we write about pharmaceutical patents on this blog, and even less often that we blog here about PTAB decisions. The former is a function of the Federal Circuit's decision in Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v....more

4 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide