Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...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
The Federal Circuit issued numerous precedential opinions last week, two of which answered long simmering questions about inter partes reviews (IPRs). Below we discuss a case addressing whether admissions of prior art in the...more
Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 20-440: In the late 1990s, Csaba Truckai invented and patented a device to treat abnormal uterine bleeding. Truckai assigned his interest to his company, Novacept, which in turn...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
Network-1 sued HP, among others, for patent infringement. Another defendant then filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition. Following institution, HP filed its own petition on different grounds and a motion to join the...more
In General Access Sols., Ltd. v. Sprint Spectrum, et al., No. 2:20-cv-00007-RWS, ECF No. 128 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 1, 2020), the Eastern District of Texas denied a motion to strike invalidity defenses as barred by IPR estoppel for...more
In Network-1 Technologies, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Company, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s holding that joinder petitioner Hewlett Packard (“HP”) (1) could have tried to raise new grounds in its...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of judgment as a matter of law finding that the musical Jersey Boys did not infringe a copyright held in an autobiography of band member Tommy...more
Mere Potential for Future Appeal Does Not Prevent Triggering Estoppel of Inter Partes Reexamination When Party Fails to Seek Relief in the First Instance - In Virnetx Inc. v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1591, -1592,...more
In the latest round of the Apple/VirnetX saga, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held to its precedents in determining when 35 USC § 317(b) estoppel is triggered against inter partes re-examinations. VirnetX...more
The Federal Circuit recently decided a reexamination case, VirnetX v. Apple and Cisco, that addressed two issues: (1) was requester estopped from maintaining its reexams under the pre-AIA version of 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) (2006)...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Celgene Corporation v. Laura A. Peter, Appeal Nos. 2018-1167, -1168, -1169, -1171 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2019) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit held that the retroactive...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit granted, in part, a panel rehearing request and remanded an IPR to the PTAB in view of SAS to address claims that were not initially instituted by the Board. Broad Ocean Tech., LLC v. Nidec...more
Federal Circuit Sheds Some Light on How SAS May Impact Pending Appeals from the PTAB — Court Terminates Appeals of Partially-Instituted IPRs and Remands Back to the PTAB to Consider Non-Instituted “Claims and Grounds” in...more
By statute, an IPR cannot be instituted if the petitioner, real party in interest, or its “privy” was sued for infringing the patent more than one year before the petition for the IPR. 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). As we previously...more
Core Wireless v. LG affirms the denial of summary judgment as to unpatentable subject matter, ruling that the asserted claims are directed to an improved user interface for computing devices, not to the abstract idea of an...more
Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its quarterly newsletter. The newsletter covers a wide range of current IP topics: updated predictions on patent policy under the Trump administration; recent happenings...more
Mankes v. Vivid Seats Ltd. (No. 2015-1909, 4/22/16) (Taranto, Schall, Chen) - Taranto, J. Vacating judgment on the pleadings dismissing cases for inadequately pleading divided infringement and remanding for...more
In This Issue: - The Fairness in Class Action Litigation Act of 2015 - Class Certification Decisions: ..Decisions Granting Motions to Strike/Dismiss Class Claims ..Decisions Denying Motions to...more