Jones Day Talks: PTAB's Busy Docket and What's Changed After SAS Institute
Claim terms are usually given their ordinary meaning in light of the intrinsic evidence, but what if the ordinary meaning of two claim terms presents an obvious contradiction? That is the issue that the Federal Circuit will...more
On December 4, 2023, the Federal Court issued its public judgment and reasons in two patent infringement actions pursuant to s. 6(1) of the Patented Medicines (Notice of Compliance) Regulations (“Regulations”) and two patent...more
In a nonprecedential opinion on remand from the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and a US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director-granted request for review, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) reconstrued...more
On June 13, 2022, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion that vacated the district court’s judgment of indefiniteness, deciding that the ruling was based on an erroneous claim construction. The patents-in-suit...more
Evaluating whether a patent claim is sufficiently “definite” under 35 U.S.C. § 112 requires looking beyond just the claim language itself. The Federal Circuit reaffirmed this fundamental principle in a recent decision...more
As Federal Circuitry readers likely know, the Supreme Court occasionally invites the Solicitor General to file a brief expressing the views of the United States in a case where the Court is considering granting certiorari....more
In Horizon Pharma, Inc. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories Inc.,1 the Federal Circuit held that the claim language “the AM and PM unit dose forms further target a mean % time” as indefinite because the phrase was incomprehensible....more
In Network-1 Technologies, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Co.,1 the Federal Circuit held the claim term “main power source” was interpreted to include both AC and DC power sources, especially where specification never described that...more
CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. v. UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING RESEARCH - Before Newman, Lourie, and Schall. Appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Intrinsic evidence is sufficient support for claim construction in an...more
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a district court’s construction of the terms “antibody” and “antibody fragment.” The court’s constructions were not consistent with the claim language, and nothing in the specification or...more
Addressing the appeal of a judgment that four US patents were infringed and not invalid, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: • Found waiver regarding a claim construction issue • Found direct infringement...more
In a split decision, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court claim construction, finding that the claim term “100% by weight (of a layer),” considered in the context of the claim and...more
BRADIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC V. ANDREI IANCU - Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A clear and unambiguous definition of a claim term is required to redefine the term to...more
Jones Day's Dave Cochran and Matt Johnson discuss recent developments in patent litigation and appeals, including the continuing importance of the PTAB as a jurisdiction of first choice for patent disputes in the United...more
In a case that hinged on the construction of a disputed claim term, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that the district court erred in limiting the disputed claim based on the preferred embodiment and...more
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Encompasses All Embodiments in the Absence of Support Specifically Excluding an Embodiment - In Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Nestle USA, Inc., Appeal No. 2017-1290, the Federal Circuit...more