On remand from the Supreme Court, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reconsidered the boundaries of the doctrine of assignor estoppel. The Federal Circuit found that the patent assignor was estopped from...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Join the conference that the “who’s who” of Hatch-Waxman litigators have designated as the forum which sets the standards for Paragraph IV practice. ACI’s Paragraph IV Litigation Conference is returning LIVE & IN-PERSON to...more
In earlier posts, we reported that the Supreme Court granted Minerva Surgical, Inc.’s petition for a writ of certiorari on the question of “whether a defendant in a patent infringement action who assigned the patent, or is in...more
On April 21, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral arguments in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., a case involving whether the doctrine of assignor estoppel should be retained, abolished, or limited. In general, assignor...more
The Supreme Court heard oral argument last week in Minerva Surgical Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. over the issue of assignor estoppel. As a reminder, the case arose in an infringement suit over U.S. Patent Nos. 6,782,183 and...more
On Wednesday, April 21, 2021, oral arguments will commence in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., and William H. Milliken, a director in Sterne Kessler’s Trial & Appellate Practice Group, will be live-tweeting updates...more
On January 8, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a case calling for it to abolish or limit the doctrine of assignor estoppel. See Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., et al., No. 20-440, 2021 WL 77248 (U.S. Jan....more
On January 8, 2021, the Supreme Court granted a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by Minerva Surgical, Inc. on September 30, 2020. The question presented is “whether a defendant in a patent infringement action who...more
HOLOGIC, INC. v. MINERVA SURGICAL, INC. Before Wallach, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeals from the United States District Court District of Delaware. Summary: The doctrine of assignor estoppel precludes an assignor from...more
On Wednesday, the Federal Circuit held that while assignor estoppel is applicable in district court proceedings, petitions for inter partes review continue to not be subject to the equitable remedy. Assignor estoppel is an...more
The inventor on the patent, Dr. Cheriton, was employed by Cisco as a technical advisor and chief product architect at the time he filed the application that led to the patent. Dr. Cheriton assigned all rights to the...more
A preliminary decision in the District Court of Delaware introduces the possibility that a patentee’s victory on assignor estoppel in the district court could quash a co-pending IPR proceeding at the PTAB. Assignor estoppel...more
Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in the IPR Context - In Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1525, 2017-1577, the Federal Circuit held that the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously...more
Assignor estoppel is an equitable doctrine that prevents a party who assigns a patent to another from later challenging the validity of the assigned patent. As reported in a prior post, the Federal Circuit recently stated...more
Addressing the applicability of assignor estoppel to inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that Congress’ intent was clear: assignor estoppel does not apply. Arista...more
Historically, inventors who assign a patent to a company or other entity have been barred from later challenging the patent’s validity under the doctrine of “assignor estoppel.” This common-law doctrine has been in place for...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously leaves no room for assignor estoppel to apply in...more
In patent litigation, assignor estoppel is a common law doctrine that can dramatically alter the rights of both parties involved – when applicable it is dispositive on the issue of patent validity. However, despite the import...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued Final Written Decisions regarding Cisco’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,377,577 (the “’577 Patent”) and 7,023,853 (the “’853 Patent”) on May 25, 2017 and U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 (the...more
In a complex 42-page decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed issues of assignor estoppel, claim indefiniteness, subject matter eligibility, claim preclusion, willfulness and lost profits damages...more
On October 20, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued yet another opinion finding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decisions related to the institution of an inter partes review (IPR) are not subject to judicial review. ...more
The Federal Circuit recently determined that it lacked jurisdiction to review the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that assignor estoppel has no affect in an inter partes review (“IPR”). The majority’s decision...more