News & Analysis as of

Apple Patent Infringement Prior Art

Jones Day

PTAB Allows Three Concurrent IPR Petitions for Unusual Patent Claims

Jones Day on

Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) was persuaded to consider the merits of three out of seven concurrent petitions for an inter partes review of a single patent due to the patent’s complicated claiming...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Healthtech Patents: What Alivecor v. Apple Means for AI-Powered Innovation

Fenwick & West LLP on

A major Federal Circuit ruling just sent a clear message to AI-driven healthtech companies: AI alone won’t get you a patent....more

Jones Day

Patent Appendix That Was Referenced, But Not Incorporated, Is Not Prior Art

Jones Day on

In Apple Inc. v. DoDots Licensing Sols. LLC, IPR2023-00939, Paper 12 (PTAB Jan. 3, 2024) (“Decision”), the PTAB clarified what is and what is not part of the prior art, and as such what can be considered by the PTAB in an IPR...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: California Institute of Technology v. Broadcom...

Caltech sued Broadcom and Apple for infringement, asserting three of its data transmission patents against Broadcom’s WiFi chips and certain Apple products that incorporate those chips. Apple then filed IPR petitions...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - November 2022 #2

In re: Apple Inc., Appeal No. 2022-162 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 8, 2022) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit granted Apple’s petition for mandamus, directing the District Court for the Western District of Texas to vacate...more

Jones Day

Don’t Save The Best: Federal Circuit Confirms Broad IPR Estoppel

Jones Day on

The patent fight between Caltech and Broadcom/Apple made waves this month when the Federal Circuit vacated the $1.1 billion infringement award that Caltech had won in district court....more

Goldberg Segalla

Federal Circuit Clarifies IPR Estoppel and Vacates $1.1 Billion Verdict in Favor of Caltech Due to Improper Damages Theory

Goldberg Segalla on

On February 4, 2022, the Federal Circuit clarified that IPR estoppel extends to all claims and invalidity grounds that the petitioner could have reasonably asserted in its IPR petition. ...more

Jones Day

CAFC Holds Applicant Admitted Prior Art Cannot be the Basis of an IPR Ground

Jones Day on

Section 311(b) limits inter partes review to “ground[s] that could be raised under section 102 or 103 and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications.” 35 U.S.C. § 311(b) (emphasis added). An...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2021

Knobbe Martens on

Bulk-Filed Patent Applications Claiming Distant Priority Trigger Prosecution Laches - In Hyatt v. Hirshfeld, Appeal No. 18-2390, the Federal Circuit held that the PTO met its burden to prove prosecution laches for bulk-filed...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2020 #2

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeal No. 2019-1169, -1260 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020) - Our case of the week concerns issues particular to inter partes review...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more

Knobbe Martens

IXI IP, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before O’Malley, Mayer, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claims may be rejected under 35 § U.S.C. 103 based on implicit disclosures of a prior art reference....more

Jackson Walker

Ex Parte Reexamination May Cost Apple $177 Million

Jackson Walker on

On May 24, 2018, Apple was awarded a verdict of $533 million for Samsung’s infringement of three Apple design patents. While unsuccessful ex parte reexaminations (EPRs) were filed against two of those three design patents,...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Holds That Statements Made In IPRs Can Lead To Prosecution Disclaimer

Jones Day on

In Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 16-1599 (Fed. Cir. May 11, 2017) (“Federal Circuit Op.”), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that Apple did not infringe Aylus’s patents. See Aylus Networks,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Obviousness Inquiry Allows Flexibility in Considering Teachings of Prior Art

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing issues of obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of obviousness based on a flexible approach and further clarified the appropriate evaluation of secondary considerations...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Smartphone Patent War: En Banc Federal Circuit Rebukes Earlier Panel Decision and Reinstates Jury Verdicts for Apple against...

McDermott Will & Emery on

In its October 7 en banc decision in Apple v. Samsung, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, without benefit of en banc briefing, issued an unusual opinion overturning a panel decision for the purpose of...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IP Newsflash - January 2016

SUPREME AND FEDERAL COURT CASES - U.S. Supreme Court Denies Writ to Overturn Application of the Kessler Doctrine - The U.S. Supreme Court denied software developer’s SpeedTrack writ to overturn the Federal...more

Troutman Pepper

A Decision Not to Institute a Trial at the PTAB Does Not Carry Much Weight in Federal Court

Troutman Pepper on

Two recent cases show that simply avoiding a post-grant review proceeding at the U.S. Patent Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) not only does not preclude a defendant in underlying patent infringement litigation in...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Comparison of Design Patent and Trade Dress Protection in Light of the Federal Circuit’s Decision in Apple v. Samsung

In a decision authored by Chief Judge Sharon Prost, the Federal Circuit held that while design patents covering product configurations – that is, “a product feature or a combination or arrangement of features” – can protect...more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTAB Petition Must Specifically Explain the Grounds for Invalidity - Apple Inc., v. ContentGuard Holdings, Inc.

In a trio of orders addressing the extent of express explanation required in a petition for post-grant review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found each petition defective for lack of explanation regarding...more

21 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