Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 148: Listen and Learn -- Claim and Issue Preclusion (Civil Procedure)
JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
In a recent opinion, the Federal Circuit added several new wrinkles to amendment practice in inter partes review proceedings. The court affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that most of the original...more
On December 8 2022, the Federal Circuit in Google LLC v. Hammond Development Int’l, Inc. affirmed in part and reversed in part the PTAB’s final written decision of an IPR holding that Google failed to prove that certain...more
Google LLC v. Hammond Development International, Inc., Appeal No. 2021-2218 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8, 2022) - In the only precedential patent decision this week, the Federal Circuit issued a decision concerning the effect of...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
SynQor, Inc. appealed the inter partes reexamination decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) holding un- patentable as obvious original claims 1–19, 28, and 31 of SynQor’s patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,072,190 as...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
In a nonprecedential decision, the Federal Circuit gave a mixture of success and failure to the parties in four separate inter partes review decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, in C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Medline...more
On February 22, 2021, the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time whether collateral estoppel (i.e., issue preclusion) was applicable in inter partes reexamination proceedings. The case is SynQor, Inc. v. Vicor Corp.,...more
In SynQor, Inc. v. Vicor Corp., Case No. 19-1704 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 22, 2021), the Federal Circuit vacated the inter partes reexamination decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”). As part of the decision,...more
A recent case in the Northern District of Illinois addressed the issue of collateral estoppel in connection with patents that were similar to those previously cancelled by the PTAB: In Think Prods., Inc. v. Acco Brands...more
The written description requirement has had a twenty-five year renaissance, particularly in the chemical and biotechnology arts as a way of restricting claim scope to what an inventor has actually invented (see Regents of the...more
A recent ruling from the Patent and Trial Appeal Board (PTAB) highlights the critical role that collateral estoppel (also known as issue preclusion) can play in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. In a final written...more
In Think Prod., Inc. v. ACCO Brands Corp., No. 18-CV-07506, 2019 WL 6609427, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 5, 2019), the District Court addressed whether the plaintiff patent ower was collaterally estopped from arguing validity in...more
Recently, in Sanofi-Aventis v. Mylan, 2:17-cv-09105-SRC-CLW, Judge Stanley Chesler of the United States District Court, District of New Jersey, denied a motion by defendant Mylan for summary judgment of invalidity of asserted...more
Curver Luxembourg, SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2214 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2019) In a significant case in the field of design patents, the Federal Circuit clarified the scope of design patent infringement...more
In a precedential decision delivered this week, the Federal Circuit shot down arguments from Appellants BTG International Limited; Janssen Biotech, Inc.; Janssen Oncology, Inc.; and Janssen Research & Development, LLC (BTG),...more
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
Spineology, Inc. v. Wright Medical Technology Inc. (No. 2018-1276, 12/14/18) (Prost, Dyk, Moore) - Moore, J. Affirming denial of motion for attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. “[W]e caution future litigants to tread...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - VirnetX Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-2490, -2494 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 10, 2018) The Federal Circuit affirmed two final written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), which...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
Addressing final decisions in two separate inter partes reviews, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) claim construction because of collateral estoppel in one case,...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - SimpleAir, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2016-2738 (Fed. Cir. 2018) - In SimpleAir, Inc. v Google LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule...more
Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more
Parallel District Court and PTAB Proceedings - In Douglas Dynamics, LLC v. Meyer Prods. LLC, No. 3:14-cv0886-JDP (W.D. Wis. April 18, 2017), the district court for the Western District of Wisconsin drew a clear line...more