News & Analysis as of

Article III Patents Appeals

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Without Concrete Evidence of Potential Infringement Liability, Petitioner Lacked Standing to Challenge PTAB’s Final Written...

The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”) final written decision for lack of standing where it found the appellant failed to provide evidence sufficient to show it suffered an injury in fact....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Blurred Vision: Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Standing

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed a patent challenger’s appeal in an inter partes review (IPR) because the challenger could not meet the injury-in-fact requirement for Article III standing. Platinum...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2024 #3

Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., Appeal No. 2024-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit clarifies rules relating to when an applicant’s patent can be...more

McDermott Will & Emery

See Here: No Standing Based on Vague Future Plans or Adverse Priority Findings

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from a final written decision in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, finding that the petitioner lacked standing because it suffered no injury in fact....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2022 #3

Mitek Systems, Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association, Appeal No. 2021-1989 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2022) - Our Case of the Week this week is a declaratory judgment action brought against USAA. In a 27-page opinion,...more

Knobbe Martens

It Is Not Controversial: Factual and Legal Specificity Needed in Standing Dismissals

Knobbe Martens on

MITEK SYS., INC. V. UNITED SERVS. AUTO. ASS’N - Before Dyk, Taranto, and Cunningham.  Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary:  Declaratory judgment plaintiffs must identify...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Shots Fired: Challenger Must Have Requisite Standing Before Appealing Unfavorable IPR Decisions

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found, in the context of an appeal from an inter partes review (IPR) decision, that the appellant had Article III standing and affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board)...more

Knobbe Martens

No Standing in IPR Appeal for Sublicensee’s Speculative Royalty-Based Injuries

Knobbe Martens on

MODERNATX, INC. v. ARBUTUS BIOPHARMA CORPORATION - Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Stoll.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Sublicensee’s theory of royalty-based injury was too speculative to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No More Bites at the Apple: Imminent and Non-Speculative Standing Still Required

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated that a patent challenger did not have Article III appellate standing to obtain review of a final Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling because the underlying...more

Knobbe Martens

No Standing for Second Bite at the Apple

Knobbe Martens on

APPLE, INC. v. QUALCOMM, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Apple lacked standing to appeal an IPR decision upholding patents that Apple licenses from...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Old Dawg, Still the Same Tricks: Bankruptcy Asset Successor is Also Inter Partes Re-Exam Successor

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a modified opinion correcting certain facts relating to a decision in which it originally concluded that because a plaintiff was a successor in bankruptcy, it was a...more

Knobbe Martens

If You Buy the Whole Company, You Can Fight Its Legal Battles

Knobbe Martens on

MOJAVE DESERT HOLDINGS, LLC v. CROCS, INC. Before Newman, Dyk, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The purchaser or assignee of all assets and interests of the requester of inter...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Last Week in the Federal Circuit (January 4-8): Mooting your opponent’s appeal

Now that the new year has started, we’re seeing an uptick in precedential opinions.  This week we decided to turn back to patent appeals, taking a look at IPRs and Article III—always a fun topic.  Below we provide our usual...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Define Frustration: Appealing from Decision in Suit Against Co-Owner’s Wholly Owned Subsidiary with Major Issues Still Undecided

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a grant of summary judgment of non-infringement and remanded for resolution of numerous factual issues in a case addressing “extremely frustrating” issues involving the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

A Party May Have Standing Even with Incorrect Patent Assignment

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision that a reformation of an incorrect assignment supports Article III standing and affirmed the court’s prejudgment interest award....more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Non-Limiting” Prior Art Claims Support Obviousness After Standing Is Established

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issue of Article III standing and obviousness in an appeal of an inter partes review (IPR) decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the petitioner had standing to appeal because past...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Argentum Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Last week, the Federal Circuit had the occasion to address anew the requirements for standing to appeal an adverse decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review proceeding under Article III of the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Article III Standing Required to Appeal Final Decisions by the PTAB

Addressing the issue of Article III standing in an appeal of an inter partes review (IPR) decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal because the party appealing failed to establish an...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Generic Drug Developer Lacks Standing to Appeal Adverse IPR Ruling

The Federal Circuit recently held a generic drug developer lacked Article III standing to appeal an adverse patentability determination by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) because it failed to prove that it suffered...more

Goodwin

Federal Circuit Finds Pfizer’s RUXIENCE Plans Insufficient to Establish Standing to Appeal IPR

Goodwin on

On April 27, 2020, the Federal Circuit issued a non-precedential opinion ruling that Pfizer failed to establish Article III standing in a pair of IPR appeals.  At the PTAB, Pfizer had challenged the validity of Chugai’s...more

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

2019 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: Challenges to the Constitutionality of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Since the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inception, it has faced questions regarding its constitutionality. This past year was no different. In 2019, aggrieved patent owners raised numerous constitutional challenges...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: AVX Corp. v. Presidio Components, Inc., 923 F.3d 1357...

AVX Corporation, a company that manufactures and sells a variety of electronic components including capacitors, petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Presidio Components, Inc.’s patent directed to single-layer ceramic...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. LSI Corp., 926 F.3d 1327...

LSI and Ericsson petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several patents owned by the University of Minnesota (UMN). UMN moved to dismiss each IPR based on state sovereign immunity. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Concrete Controversy if There Are No Claims

McDermott Will & Emery on

In reversing a district court decision as to whether a validity issue remained justiciable after the challenged claims were disclaimed, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that the patent owner’s...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Competitor Standing for Appeal of IPR Decision Upholding Claims

Again addressing the question of appellate standing for inter partes review (IPR) decisions, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that an IPR petitioner did not show a sufficient injury to confer Article III...more

76 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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