News & Analysis as of

Appeals Judicial Review Administrative Proceedings

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more

Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart,...

Supreme Court Places Another Limitation on Chevron Deference

The justices of the Supreme Court of the United States have again limited the reach of Chevron deference. On May 28, 2019, the Court in Smith v. Berryhill carved another exception into what has lately proven to be its...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Smith v. Berryhill

On May 28, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Smith v. Berryhill, holding a dismissal by the Social Security Administration’s Appeals Council on timeliness grounds after a claimant has had an administrative law judge...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: Wi-Fi One v. Broadcom, 878 F.3D 1364 (FED....

Broadcom sought inter partes review of three patents owned by Wi-Fi One. In response to Broadcom’s petitions, Wi-Fi One argued that the IPR was barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because Broadcom was in privity with certain...more

Smart & Biggar

Rx IP Update - January 2019

Smart & Biggar on

IN THIS ISSUE: -Abbott/Takeda permitted to plead that a third party’s patent would be infringed by alleged non-infringing alternative - PMPRB News: **PMPRB issues a Notice of Hearing for allegations of excessive...more

Knobbe Martens

Standing to Appeal PTAB Decision to Federal Circuit is Measured for the Appellant, Not the Appellee

Knobbe Martens on

The Federal Circuit determined that Article III standing was not necessary for an appellee to participate in a judicial appeal of an IPR final written decision because the appellant had Article III standing in Personal Audio,...more

Smart & Biggar

Rx IP Update - May 2017

Smart & Biggar on

Federal Court of Appeal finds that Apotex did not fail to mitigate its damages in relation to Apo-Trazodone drug submission - On April 6, 2017, the Federal Court of Appeal overturned the Federal Court’s finding that...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Finds IPR Petitioner Lacks Standing To Appeal

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On January 9, 2017, in Phigenix, Inc. v. Immunogen, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that petitioner Phigenix lacked standing to appeal an adverse final written decision in an IPR. While acknowledging that the AIA permits a...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Wisconsin Court of Appeals Enforces Parties’ Stipulation to Remedies and Waiver of Judicial Review in Administrative Proceeding

Foley & Lardner LLP on

While many of us spent this past Halloween gorging on a variety of candies and sweets, Wisconsin’s court of appeals was busy rendering an opinion that likely left Travis Technology High School (“Travis Tech”) with a decidedly...more

King & Spalding

HHS Proposes Significant Changes to ALJ Hearing Procedures

King & Spalding on

HHS announced a Proposed Rule on July 5, 2016 aimed at reducing the backlog of appeals at the Office of Medicare Hearings and Appeals (OMHA) and Departmental Appeals Board (DAB) for Medicare payment and coverage...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court Decides Two Key Aspects of IPR in Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on June 20, 2016 in Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee that: (1) the statutory authority of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) in instituting an inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding is...more

Ladas & Parry LLP

Cuozzo V. Lee: Supreme Court Affirmed That Claims Should Be Given Their Broadest Reasonable Interpretation In Inter Partes Review

Ladas & Parry LLP on

On June 20th, in Cuozzo v. Lee, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit holding that claims should be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in inter partes review proceedings....more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Supreme Court Upholds the PTAB’s Status Quo in Cuozzo

On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, which unanimously upheld the “broadest reasonable construction” claim construction standard (BRI) used by the Patent Trial and...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Defers to the Patent Office on Institution and Management of Post-Grant Proceedings

Foley Hoag LLP on

In Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, the Supreme Court handed a victory to the Patent Office, affirming its broad discretion in the institution and management of post-issuance proceedings created by the Leahy-Smith...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Supreme Court Affirms Cuozzo – Leaving in Place BRI and Judicial Review Limitation for IPR Proceedings

In Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, No. 15-446, the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s holdings on claim construction and the scope of judicial review in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding....more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Supreme Court Defers to Patent Office on IPR Procedure, Cuozzo Speed Tech., LLC v. Lee

The United States Supreme Court decided today that: (1) the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) acted within its rulemaking authority by adopting the rule that patent claims must be given their “broadest...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee (2016)

In its first pronouncement regarding the post-grant reviewing proceedings established by the America Invents Act ("AIA"), the Supreme Court ruled that the Patent and Trademark Office's positions on two of the law's provisions...more

17 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