News & Analysis as of

Computer-Related Inventions Claim Construction Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Affirms Despite Claim Construction Error

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit upheld the PTAB’s decision deeming an integrated circuit connector patent unpatentable for obviousness, despite concluding that the Board’s claim construction was erroneous. The Court also rejected a...more

Jones Day

No Requirement to Raise All Arguments in Rehearing Request

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit in Voice Tech Corp. v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 2022-2163 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2024) (Lourie, Chen, and Cunningham), affirmed the PTAB’s determination that claims of Voice Tech Corp.’s (“Voice Tech”) U.S....more

Jones Day

District Courts Find PTAB Statements Constitute Disclaimer

Jones Day on

In Linksmart Wireless Tech., LLC v. Caesars Entm’t Corp., Case No. 2:18-cv-00862-MMD-NJK (D. Nev. May 8, 2020) the Court addressed disputed claim terms in U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE46,459 (the “’459 Patent”), Linksmart had...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Algorithm Required Where Corresponding Structure to Means-Plus-Function Term Is Computer-Implemented

The US Court of Appeals vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) obviousness decision, finding that the disputed means-plus-function term was computer-implemented and therefore required the corresponding structure to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2019 #4

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. KG v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1777 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2019) - In a sternly-worded decision this week, the Federal Circuit held claims to...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - March 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Distribution Agreements Can Constitute Offers for Sale Under Section 102(b) - In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, 2014-1504, the Federal Circuit held that a distribution agreement qualified as...more

Jones Day

District Court Considers IPR In Deciding Alice Motion

Jones Day on

On November 20, 2017, a district court denied a defendant’s Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (“Rule”) 12(b)(6) motion that sought to dismiss the case on the ground that the asserted patents were ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

"Strategies for Litigants in Patent Infringement Cases Using Motions to Dismiss Post-Alice"

Nearly three years have passed since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision on patent eligibility in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l. The decision, which ushered in an unprecedented wave of cases invalidating...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Federal Circuit Reverse a Finding of Anticipation of the PTAB in Inter Partes Review

In re Rambus, Inc. - Addressing a finding of anticipation by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide