Podcast: IP(DC): Inside Patent Reform Efforts, Anticipated Federal Circuit Appeals, and Patent Cases of the Upcoming Supreme Court Term
Is the Patent Litigation Boom Coming to an End?
In Platinum Optics Tech. Inc. v. Viavi Sols. Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision on the requirements for standing to appeal from an inter partes review (IPR) final...more
Recently, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued an opinion in Beteiro, LLC v. DraftKings Inc.[1] This case is yet another case where the Federal Circuit upheld invalidity under § 101. Here, the patents...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued its most recent precedential decision on satisfying the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement at the International Trade Commission in Zircon...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued its most recent precedential decision on patent assignments and satisfying the “domestic industry” requirement at the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) in...more
Not surprisingly, 2023 was another notable year for design rights around the globe. However, nowhere more than the U.S. did we see court decisions that will, in the case of one, and could in the case of another, have...more
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit found no abuse of discretion by the Board when it allowed Apple to expand its analogous art contention in its IPR reply, finding that the Board’s decision did not run afoul of the...more
In affirming final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in two inter partes reviews (IPRs), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled that only actual product sales count toward a...more
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a district court ruling that the asserted nonliteral elements of a software program were not copyright protectable, in part, because allegedly copied materials...more
A recent (February 9, 2023) US Court of International Trade ("CIT") remand opinion, Meyer Corp., US v. United States, has revived various global supply-chain apprehensions that a previous (August 11, 2022) reversal by the US...more
In American National v. Sleep Number Corporation, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“Board”) decision to allow a patent owner to present proposed amended...more
A recent (August 11, 2022) US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") opinion, Meyer Corp., US v. United States,1 has relieved many concerns that a previous decision by the US Court of International Trade ("CIT")...more
On July 12, 2022, U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas denied alleged infringer Lenovo’s motion to dismiss ACQIS’s willful and indirect infringement and enhanced damages claims, holding that...more
On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more
On the first of February, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) on two inter partes review (“IPR”)...more
Earlier this month, in University of Strathclyde v. Clear-Vu Lighting LLC, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) reversed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) that found claims 1-4...more
Many small businesses learn the hard way that a “bid protest” and a “size protest” differ in much more than name only. Whereas generally a “bid protest” challenges agency action taken in connection with a procurement and can...more
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - CHUDIK v. HIRSHFELD [OPINION] (2020-1833, 2/8/2021) (Taranto, Bryson, Hughes) - Taranto, J. Affirming PTO decision regarding length of patent term adjustment. The statutory...more
On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Fox Factory v. SRAM, Nos. 2018-2024 and 2018-2025, reversed the Board’s Final Written Decision in a pair of inter partes reviews (“IPRs”)...more
Suppose that you have an invention disclosure for a design of an article that you want to protect? When you review the invention disclosure, you notice that the design is ornamental, for example a pattern, on an article such...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
Inter partes reviews (IPR) are limited by statute to grounds of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 (novelty requirement) and 103 (nonobviousness requirement) and on the basis of prior art patents or printed publications....more
In a recent decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed decisions in two inter-partes review (IPR) proceedings that patents owned by ICOS Corporation directed to tadalafil formulations (used in the...more
Nothing hurts worse than a Rule 36 (single page, single sentence affirmance of the decision below) after years of work and millions of dollars spent on a case. Rule 36 makes rehearing, en banc review, and/or cert petitions a...more
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