(Podcast) The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Update on the State of Non-compete Restrictions (LaborSpeak)
UPIC Audits
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
#WorkforceWednesday®: Federal Contractors Alert - DEI Restrictions Reinstated by Appeals Court - Employment Law This Week®
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Exploring Procedural Justice | Judge Steve Leben | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Handling Post-Conviction Death Penalty Cases Pro Bono | McKenzie Edwards | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Inside the Fourth Court of Appeals’ Clerk’s Office | Michael Cruz | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Supersedeas and Other Recent Rule Changes | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Supreme Court Miniseries: Tribal Rights in the 21st Century
SDNY Chooses “Time Approach” to Calculating Lease Termination Damages Collectible Against a Bankrupt Estate
AGG Talks: Home Health & Hospice - Reimbursement Audits and Appeals
After ALJ: Options and Opportunities in the Face of an Unfavorable ALJ Decision
Understanding the SCOTUS Shadow Docket | Steve Vladeck | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Podcast: The Legal Battle Over Mifepristone - Diagnosing Health Care
Checking in On the 88th Texas Legislature | Jerry Bullard | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
After assessing whether a patent owner had standing to appeal the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s final written decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found no injury in fact to support Article III...more
In Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc., 131 F.4th 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit addressed whether the prosecution history of one patent in a patent family can limit the scope of claims in a different patent...more
Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Moderna, Inc., Appeal No. 2023-2357 (Fed. Cir. June 4, 2025) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a final judgment that Moderna’s mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine did...more
The PTAB has published its monthly statistics wrap up for April 2025. As expected, those statistics show a significant decline in the institution rate compared to the first six months of the fiscal year. In those first six...more
On May 16, 2025, the Court in Case No. 1:21-cv-01478 (D. Del.) granted bluebird bio’s motion for summary judgment, finding that its gene therapy Zynteglo® (betibeglogene autotemcel) does not infringe San Rocco Therapeutics‘...more
On May 22, 2025, the CAFC affirmed the PTAB’s (Board) Final Written Decisions in Pfizer’s IPR2021-00925 and IPR2021-00926 finding all challenged claims of uniQure’s U.S. Patent No. 9,982,248 (“the ’248 patent”) unpatentable...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s final determination that challenged patent claims were not unpatentable, finding that the Board’s decision relied on an erroneous...more
On May 27, the USPTO announced the completion of a critical upgrade to the agency’s core financial system, Momentum, to streamline maintenance of the fee payment systems as well as several internal functions....more
On May 23, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued a precedential opinion reversing a final written decision from the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) finding the challenged...more
This Federal Circuit Opinion analyzes invalidity based on anticipation and obviousness, more specifically based on implicit claim construction of the claim limitation and inherent disclosures....more
On May 16, 2025, USPTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart released the first four discretionary denial decisions under the PTAB’s new process. Under the new process, the parties separately brief discretionary denial issues...more
While it may seem like the only constant at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is change, that sentiment rings especially true in 2025. With a new presidential administration in the White House and numerous...more
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 2023-1101 (Fed. Cir. (W.D. Tex.) May 23, 2025). En banc opinion by Moore, joined by Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll. Opinion concurring in part and dissenting in part by...more
The Federal Circuit recently resolved a split among the district courts whether patent infringement defendants who bring inter partes review (IPR) challenges are estopped from raising new prior art challenges in a co-pending...more
Regents of the Univ. of California v. Broad Inst., Inc., No. 2022-1594, 2025 WL 1363125 (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2025) - On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the Patent Trial and Appeals...more
Key Takeaways - - A recent Federal Circuit decision in a case involving an inter partes review (IPR) significantly narrowed a patentee’s ability to rely on estoppel to block a defendant from raising invalidity grounds. -...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board designated a recent decision as informative. In the decision, Coke Morgan Stewart, Acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trade Office (USPTO), ended the petitioner's challenges, noting that...more
On March 26, 2025, the Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office fundamentally changed how the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) initially considers petitions in post grant proceedings under the...more
Qualcomm Incorporated v. Apple Inc., No. 23-1208 (Fed. Cir. 2025)—On April 23, 2025, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that claims of Qualcomm’s U.S. Patent No. 8,063,674 (“the ’674...more
On April 16, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of inter partes review (IPR) for several claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,187,307, owned by Universal Connectivity Technologies, Inc. HP Inc., Dell...more
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) designated a recent Director Review decision as informative, signaling its significance for future proceedings. The decision emphasizes that a final district court ruling invalidating a...more
In a matter of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel does not preclude a petitioner from relying on the same patents and printed publications as...more
This LawFlash details strategic takeaways and practical lessons from the recent US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case on IPR estoppel, evidence of public use, and jury instructions on specific issues....more
In its recent decision in Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to allow Ingenico to introduce certain prior art at trial, finding that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel...more
Ingenico Inc., et al. v. IOENGINE, LLC, No. 2023-1367 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) May 7, 2025). Opinion by Hughes, joined by Dyk and Prost. Ingenico filed a declaratory judgment action against IOENGINE relating to two patents owned...more