It Only Took 13 Years: The Federal Circuit's First Derivation Proceeding Decision — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
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 recently decided Sound View Innovations, LLC v. Hulu, LLC, (“Sound View”), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a district court holding that Sound View Innovations’ patent (the ‘213 patent)...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s grant of summary judgment on inequitable conduct and a Walker Process antitrust claim arising from allegations that a patent owner withheld material...more
On February 2, 2026, a split Federal Circuit panel affirmed summary judgment of no design-patent infringement issued by a Maine federal court. Range of Motion Prods., LLC v. Armaid Co. Inc., No. 2023-2427, 2026 WL 261890...more
A design patent may include only one claim and it “shall be in formal terms to the ornamental design for the article.” But the scope of the claimed design must be construed in order to identify those ornamental, or...more
In Genuine Enabling Technology LLC v. Sony Group Corporation, decided February 19, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement: a...more
The Federal Circuit has issued a nonprecedential decision in Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, CF Dynamic Advances LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., relating to U.S. Patent No. 7,177,798 (the “798 patent”) to Rensselaer Polytechnic...more
Our Case of the Week touches on two claim construction issues – a post-jury-verdict “clarification” of a claim term by a judge, who overturned a jury verdict, and a determination whether the term “diverter” was subject to...more
In a significant decision for the biotechnology sector, the Federal Circuit provided much needed clarity on the patent eligibility of genetically engineered compositions. The Federal Circuit held that the genetically...more
In REGENXBIO v. Sarepta Therapeutics, the Federal Circuit recently held that a cell containing a non-naturally occurring recombinant nucleic acid molecule is not a product of nature and is patent‑eligible under 35 U.S.C. §...more
On February 20, 2026, the Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to a cultured host cell are patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101—reversing a district court’s January 2024 decision granting summary judgment of...more
In Ingevity Corp. v. BASF Corp., the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict finding that Ingevity Corp. (Ingevity) violated antitrust laws by tying licenses to its fuel‑vapor canister patent to purchases of its unpatented...more
In Range Of Motion Products, LLC v. Armaid Company Inc., Appeal No. 23-2427, the Federal Circuit held that functional aspects of a design must be separated out when analyzing whether an ordinary observer would find two...more
Our Patent Case Summaries provide a weekly summary of the precedential patent-related opinions issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the opinions designated precedential or informative by the Patent Trial...more
If we have learned anything from the last twelve years of patent eligibility jurisprudence, it is that the Federal Circuit continues to find new ways to disappoint. The Federal Circuit’s recent nonprecedential decision in...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a damages verdict amounting to tens of millions of dollars. The Court found that the patentee’s damages expert correctly apportioned value to the patented feature and...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of a means-plus-function claim element, emphasizing that a patentee must compare the accused product...more
Addressing subject matter eligibility in the life sciences context, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s summary judgment ruling that certain claims directed to genetically engineered...more
On February 19, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the District of Delaware’s grant of summary judgment of non infringement in favor of defendants in Genuine Enabling Tech. LLC v. Sony Corp., No....more
On February 20, 2026, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued a precedential opinion reversing and remanding a decision from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware finding the...more
Damages have become one of the most closely watched—and fiercely litigated—issues in modern patent litigation. In recent decisions, the Federal Circuit has sharpened its focus on district courts’ gatekeeping obligations for...more
On February 20, 2026, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in REGENXBIO Inc. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc., holding that claims directed at an “undisputedly human made” host cell...more
In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit heard cross-appeals from a district court’s summary judgment decisions finding inequitable conduct by patentee Tenaris, but dismissing Global Tubing’s...more
On February 20, 2026, in Case No. 24-1408, the CAFC reversed and remanded the district court’s summary judgment decision (Case No. 1:20-cv-01226 (D. Del.)) finding the claims of REGENXBIO’s U.S. Patent No. 10,526,617 (“the...more
On February 20, 2026, in REGENXBIO Inc. et al. v. Sarepta Therapeutics Inc., et al., No. 2024-1408, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court decision which held that claims covering a cultured host cell containing a...more
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI), as applied during USPTO examination, is often described as a “broad” claim construction standard. That description is accurate as far as it goes, but it is incomplete in a way that...more