Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more
The Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concerning the application of 37 CFR § 42.73(d)(3)(i)’s estoppel provisions in invalidating amended patent claims....more
Before Bryson, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”). Summary: Estoppel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i) only applies to obtaining new...more
One way that reexamination advantageously differs from other administrative post-grant review processes is the absence of word or page counts as a limiting factor in presenting the challenge, here substantial new questions of...more
As a trademark applicant, encountering a prior registration that obstructs your path to registration is never a pleasant experience (nor for your attorneys who have to inform you about it). The frustration only intensifies...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) has published an updated Oral Hearing Guide to reflect current practice before the Board. The changes include: Remote option for participating in America Invents Act (AIA) trials....more
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
Takeaways: -A requester can have a voice in ex parte reexamination prosecution. - Requesters should strategically structure their request documents to hedge against potential patent owner amendment and argument. The...more
Takeaways: - Patent owner requested reexaminations are not an admission of claim unpatentability. - Patent owners can and should control the reexamination request narrative. Patent owners must consider the pros and...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit stayed a district court’s contempt sanctions relating to an anti-suit injunction violation, finding that the adjudicated infringer had done all it could to withdraw from the...more
In an action involving manufacturers of a self-sealing dining mat for toddlers, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that the defendants were barred from obtaining relief on...more
For the first time in nearly 15 years, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued “Updated Guidance for Making a Proper Determination of Obviousness” under the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in KSR Int’l Co. v....more
A significant procedure for patent owners, Supplemental Examination, was established in the 2012 America Invents Act when Congress determined there should be a proceeding to turn events that in the past could lead to...more
In our PTAB Spotlight Series, attorneys will share their valuable insights on PTAB practice today, the challenges and opportunities clients face, and the trends practitioners should follow....more
The recent resurgence in ex parte reexamination demonstrates the importance of this post-grant review vehicle. It has become particularly important for patent challengers who may be estopped from requesting inter partes...more
A review of 2023 reveals it was an active and impactful year in shaping the policy and practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In fact, all three...more
This Year in Review synthesizes key events and decisions from 2023 into a digestible guide that we hope will serve as a helpful reference for those who practice before, or adjacent to, the PTAB. As in the past, many of our...more
In the shadow of its recent, precedent-challenging In re Cellect decision, the Federal Circuit illustrated the pedestrian application of its obviousness-type double patenting jurisprudence in affirming the Patent Trial and...more
This case addresses how Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) interacts with obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). Background - Cellect sued Samsung Electronics, Co. for infringement of four patents. Subsequently, Samsung...more
Executive Summary - The patent application examination requirement is statutory based rather than a Constitutional requirement. For instance, from 1793 to 1836, the U.S. Patent System operated on a registration system...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently published a revised PTAB Oral Hearing Guide (August 2023) updating prior guidance on hearings. The revised Guide includes changes to: 1. Remote participation in PTAB...more
The Federal Circuit recently clarified the interplay between obvious-type double patenting (ODP) and patent term adjustments (PTA) granted pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 154(b). In In re Cellect, the Federal Circuit explained that...more
The Federal Circuit has ruled that when members of a patent family have different expiration dates due to patent term adjustments (PTAs), the earlier-expiring patent family members can be used as a basis for an...more
Addressing for the first time how patent term adjustments (PTAs) interact with obviousness-type double patenting (ODP), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that when members of a patent family have...more