News & Analysis as of

CAFC

PTAB Issues New Procedures for Remands from the CAFC

by Fish & Richardson on

On November 16, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board amended its standard operating procedures and issued new guidance for parties as to what happens after the Federal Circuit remands a case. Prior to this guidance, PTAB panels...more

PTAB Issues New Standard Operating Procedure Addressing Remands from Federal Circuit: The New Standards and How They May Affect...

On November 16, 2017 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office posted a new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) addressing the conduct of cases remanded from the Federal Circuit to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). New “SOP...more

Patent Eligibility Pointers from the Federal Circuit – Part 2

In Part 1 of this post series, several decisions from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) were analyzed to explore factors that may lead a court to find patent claims ineligible under §101. The cases discussed...more

BioPharma Patents Quick Tips & News – November 2017

Diagnostic Method Claims in the U.S. I. Let’s recap the last five years! Mayo (2012) = Supreme Court prohibits patents for diagnostic methods without “significantly more” (essentially, you must not only discover a...more

CAFC Shifts the Burden for IPR Claim Amendments from the Patent Owner to the Petitioner

In Aqua Products Inc. v. Matal, a highly fractured en banc Federal Circuit determined that the PTAB, in ruling whether to allow claim amendments in an IPR proceeding, can no longer place the burden to establish the...more

CAFC Issues Writ of Mandamus reversing Eastern District of Texas 4-Factor Test for a “Regular and Established Place of Business”...

In In re: Cray, Inc, No. 2017-129, the CAFC issued a writ of mandamus vacating Judge Gilstrap’s decision involving venue under 28 U.S.C. §1400(b) in Raytheon Co. v. Cray Inc., Case No. 15-cv-1554 (E.D. Texas). That earlier...more

Patent Eligibility Pointers from the Federal Circuit – Part I

What characteristics of a claim do the courts use to determine if a claimed invention meets the statutory requirements under 35 USC §101? This question has been vexing patent attorneys for years, with the question becoming...more

Recent Trends on the U.S. Doctrine of Equivalents

U.S. courts have long recognized that a product or process which does not literally infringe a patent can nevertheless infringe under the "doctrine of equivalents" if it is equivalent to the claimed invention. The percentage...more

CAFC Finds Harmless Error in USPTO Reliance On Doctrine of Inherency

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Southwire Co. v. Cerro Wire LLC, the Federal Circuit upheld the USPTO decision rendered in an inter partes reexamination proceeding that found Southwire’s patent invalid as obvious. Although the court found that the USPTO...more

CAFC Vacates USPTO Single Reference Obviousness Rejection For Inadequate Showing Of Expectation of Success

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a split decision with Judge Lourie dissenting, the Federal Circuit vacated an obviousness rejection that had been affirmed in an ex parte appeal to the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The decision was rendered in In...more

Janssen v. Celltrion: CAFC & District Court Litigation Update

by Goodwin on

As we previously reported last year, in the ongoing Janssen v. Celltrion litigation concerning Celltrion’s Inflectra®, a biosimilar of Janssen’s Remicade® (infliximab), Janssen appealed the district court’s partial final...more

CAFC Finds Another PTAB Claim Construction Unreasonable and Again Reverses an Invalidity Holding

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the meaning of terms used in challenged claims of an unexpired patent are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the claim language and the specification. The...more

Diagnostic and Personalized Medicine Claims — Strategies for Navigating the §101 Minefield

In Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostic LLC, the Federal Circuit (CAFC) dealt another blow to the patent eligibility of diagnostic methods and the growing field of personalized medicine....more

Senate’s STRONGER Patents Act Aims to Address Key PTAB Patent Owner Woes

by Jones Day on

On June 21, Senators Chris Coons (D-Del), Tom Cotton (R-Ark), Dick Durbin (D-Ill), and Mazie Hironoa (D-Hawaii) introduced the “Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience Patents Act of...more

For Waterproofing Patent, Arguments Against Obviousness Didn’t Hold Water

The Federal Circuit’s decision in Outdry Technologies Corporation, v. Geox S.P.A. discusses some criteria for determining whether or not the explanations provided by the PTAB in an IPR decision are sufficient to support a...more

Supreme Court to Decide the Constitutionality of Inter Partes Review

In a move that could drastically change the patent law landscape, the United States Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC, No. 16-712, to answer the question...more

Earthquake Coming? Supreme Court to Weigh Constitutionality of IPRs (2nd Article)

On June 12, the Supreme Court took certiorari on probably the biggest IPR case possible: a case challenging the constitutionality of IPRs on separation-of-powers and seventh amendment grounds. This comes just a few weeks...more

Matal v. Tam: Trademark Disparagement Clause Held Unconstitutional

by Shearman & Sterling LLP on

Yesterday, the Supreme Court held in an 8–0 decision that the disparagement clause in the Trademark statute—which prohibits the registration of trademarks that may “disparage . . . or bring . . . into contemp[t] or disrepute”...more

Oil States v. Lee Brings Mother of all IPR Cases to Supreme Court

On June 12, the Supreme Court took certiorari on probably the biggest IPR case possible: a case challenging the constitutionality of IPRs on separation-of-powers and seventh amendment grounds. This comes just a few weeks...more

CAFC: What a Person of Skill in the Art “Could” Do is Insufficient Evidence to Support Obviousness Finding

Duke University owns US 7,056,712 (‘712), which claims methods of treating a metabolic disorder known as Pompe disease. In particular, ‘712 claims methods of treating Pompe disease using a recombinant human acid...more

CAFC Finds ANDA Infringement Despite Differences Between FDA Labeling And Claim Language

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a non-precedential decision issued in Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Breckenridge Pharmaceutical, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Breckenridge, and...more

AIA On-Sale Bar Applies to Publicized Sales, Even When Knowledge of Sale Did Not Disclose the Underlying Invention

by Pepper Hamilton LLP on

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently construed the on-sale bar provision of 35 U.S.C. 102(a) in a way that will make it easier for petitioners to challenge third party patents. While in an inter-partes...more

Federal Circuit Denies Claim Under SCA Price Adjustment Clause for Pension Withdrawal Liability

by Holland & Knight LLP on

Last month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a decision of the U.S. Court of Federal Claims upholding and NASA’s denial of a claim in the amount of about $2 million for reimbursement pension...more

Federal Circuit Swats Appeal in View of Patent Owner Failures

In the recent decision in Securus Technologies, Inc. v. Global Tel*Link Corporation, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) addressed a number of issues, a couple of which are worth noting as potential pitfalls...more

Wasica Decision Reinforces Federal Circuit Guidance on Claim Construction

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Wasica Finance v. Continental Automotive Systems touched on a number of well-worn patent issues, but this article focuses on a few key claim construction principles discussed by the...more

99 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
Cybersecurity

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.