News & Analysis as of

Appeals Patents Chevron Deference

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Reviewing 2024's Crucial Patent Law Developments

As 2024 draws to a close, several crucial developments — some aimed at modernizing long-standing legal practices, others addressing emerging challenges — have reached patent law. Originally published in Law360 - December...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Another Kind of Term Limit: Delay Resulting from After-Allowance Amendments Deducted from PTA

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the US Patent & Trademark Office’s (PTO) decision on a patent term adjustment (PTA), finding that it was appropriate to deduct days from a patent term when the...more

Sunstein LLP

Court’s Strict Interpretation of Timing Requirement May Force Patent Validity Challenges in Two Forums

Sunstein LLP on

The America Invents Act (“AIA”), signed into law in 2011, introduced inter partes review (“IPR”), which allows parties to challenge the validity of patent claims in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Federal Circuit Holds that Issue Joinder is Unavailable in IPRs

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

In Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, No. 2018-1400 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 18, 2020), the Federal Circuit held that the “clear and unambiguous text of” 35 U.S.C. § 315(c) does not authorize “same-party joinder” and...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2020)

It's often said that hard cases make bad law.  And that is what had happened here:  faced with an unreasonable number of potentially asserted claims in litigation, and a Plaintiff not required to identify which of those...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Sides with PTO on Applicant Delay in Patent Term Adjustment

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a case explaining what comprises an “applicant delay” in the context of a patent term adjustment (PTA), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sided with the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) ruling that the...more

Knobbe Martens

An Improper Reply to a Final Office Action May Result in the Accrual of Applicant Delay for PTA Calculations

Knobbe Martens on

INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC v. IANCU - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary:  If a proper reply to a final Office Action is not...more

Jones Day

Post-Filing, Pre-Institution Merger Time-Bars Inter Partes Review

Jones Day on

In Power Integrations v. Semiconductor Components, the Federal Circuit ruled that privy and real-party-in-interest (RPI) relationships arising after a petition is filed but before institution may bar institution under section...more

Knobbe Martens

Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Et Al. v. Iancu

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Schall, and Reyna. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: The USPTO is only authorized to reduce Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) for applicant...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Dismissal “Without Prejudice” Does Not Nullify Service of Complaint

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing 35 USC § 315(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sat en banc to determine whether dismissal “without prejudice” would extinguish the effect of a previously served infringement complaint, an event...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2018 #5

Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp., Appeal Nos. 2017-1698, et al. (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2018) (unsealed July 24, 2018) In a lengthy decision on an issue of first impression, the Federal Circuit addressed the...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Fractured Federal Circuit Holds Patent Owner Does Not Bear Burden of Persuasion in IPR Motions to Amend - In Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, Appeal No. 2015-1177, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, held that a patent...more

WilmerHale

Jumping into the Deep End: Amendment Practice Post-Aqua Products

WilmerHale on

In the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc decision in Aqua Products, a deeply fractured court provides a glimpse into the perspectives that some of the judges have on post-grant practice at the...more

Hogan Lovells

Federal Circuit Shifts Burden of Proof for Amendments in Post-Grant Proceedings

Hogan Lovells on

On October 4, 2017, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, issued a ruling in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, placing the burden of persuasion on the petitioner to prove the invalidity of amended claims in post-grant...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

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

Supreme Court Maintains Status Quo on Broadest Reasonable Claim Interpretation Test and Non-Appealability of Institution Decisions

On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, No. 15-4461, an appeal of an institution and cancellation decision in the first-ever petition for inter partes review...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

Mintz

Suprema, Inc. v. ITC: En Banc Federal Circuit Confirms ITC’s Jurisdiction to Exclude Articles Based on Induced Infringement

Mintz on

On August 10, 2015, the full US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Suprema, Inc. v. ITC, which overturned an earlier panel decision and confirmed, by a 6–4 vote, that the International...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

En Banc Federal Circuit Keeps Induced Infringement Alive at the ITC

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an en banc opinion today finding that induced infringement may form the basis for an investigation of unfair import practices at the International Trade Commission (ITC)....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Lee (Fed. Cir. 2015) - Filing of IDS after Response to Restriction Requirement Constitutes Failure to...

Last week, in Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Lee, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision by the District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granting summary judgment to the Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark...more

23 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