News & Analysis as of

Expert Testimony Patents Obviousness

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Issues Additional Information on New Pre-Institution Discretionary Briefing

On April 25, 2025, the USPTO issued additional information in response to frequently asked questions (FAQs) about the “Interim Processes for PTAB Workload Management” memorandum issued on March 26, 2025. As discussed in our...more

Knobbe Martens

No Error: The Board Committed No Procedural Error by Relying on Evidence Outside of the Prior Art Reference

Knobbe Martens on

SAGE PRODUCTS, LLC v. STEWART [OPINION] - Before Reyna, Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board did not abuse its discretion by relying on...more

Jones Day

Expert Testimony Supporting POPR Can Be An Effective Strategy

Jones Day on

It is relatively uncommon for parties to submit expert declarations in the preliminary-response phase of an IPR proceeding, but recently the Patent Owner in Imperative Care, Inc. v. Inari Medical, Inc. effectively used that...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Construing Unambiguous Claim Language and Qualifying Challenged Expert as POSITA

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issues of claim construction and the requisite expert qualifications to testify on obviousness and anticipation, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2024 Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2024 Decisions

2024 brought exciting developments at the Federal Circuit. The court issued its first en banc decision in a patent case in five years in LKQ, which significantly altered the standard for proving obviousness of a design...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2024 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends – 2024 PTAB Case Highlights

Abuse of Process and/or Sanctions – 37 C.F.R. § 42.12 - Spectrum Solutions LLC v. Longhorn Vaccines & Diagnostics, LLC, IPR2021-00847, IPR2021-00850, IPR2021-00854, IPR2021-00857 & IPR2021-00860 - Decision...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Apple Prevails and Federal Circuit Puts Expert Testimony in the Spotlight

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) recently issued its opinion in Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, a case that focuses on obviousness under 35 U.S.C. §103, claim breadth and the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Voluminous Expert Testimony and Exhibits Insufficient on Their Own to Warrant Denial of IPR Institution

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted institution of inter partes review of a patent directed to delivery of targeted television advertisements. The board rejected patent owner’s argument that a lack of particularity as...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Intellectual Property Report - August 2024

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Be an Expert: Precedential PTAB Decision on Conclusory Expert TestimonyStutti TilwaA recent precedential decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) may serve as a warning for those parties who plan on relying on...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Is Evidence of All Claimed Elements in Prior Art Enough? Not Without Motivation to Combine

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness decision, finding that disclosure in the prior art of all recited claim elements across multiple references, without more,...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2023

Knobbe Martens on

Substantial Evidence in Determining Obviousness - In Schwendimann v. Neenah, Inc, Appeal No. 22-1335, the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB’s finding on obviousness is supported by substantial evidence that a skilled...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Money, Mo’ Problems: Speculative Damages Award Cannot Stand

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s claim construction and jury instructions but reversed a premature judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on obviousness and an imprecise damages award....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2023 #3

Cyntec Company, Ltd. v. Chilisin Electronics Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1873 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 16, 2023) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a California district court’s judgment as a...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Results from Phase I and II Clinical Trials and Pending Phase III Clinical Trial Insufficient to Render Obvious Method of Treating...

In an ANDA case in the District of Delaware, the court has rejected an obviousness challenge to a patented method of increasing survival in patients having prostate cancer. The court found that early clinical trial results...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Breaking Up Is Hard to Do: Validity Upheld Based on Expert Separation Testimony

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision finding that two patents covering enantiomerically pure compositions of the psoriasis drug Otezla® (apremilast) were valid and one patent...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB Precedential Ruling: Expert Declaration Devoid of Supporting Evidence Dooms IPR Petition

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board recently rejected an inter partes review petition that relied on a conclusory and unsupported expert declaration. The expert’s written testimony, which repeated portions of the petition...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Almirall, LLC v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, 28...

Almirall’s patent claims recite: [a]bout 4% w/w of a polymeric viscosity builder comprising acrylamide/sodium acryloyldimethyl taurate copolymer…. The Board instituted an IPR on the patent, where the primary reference...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Bad Connection: Claim Construction Argument without Explanation Given No Weight

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) obviousness decision after finding that the patent owner failed to explain how its cited extrinsic evidence supported its proposed...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IPR Petition Denied Due to Expert’s Lack of Relevant Experience

A recent board decision denying inter partes review serves as a reminder that an expert opining on obviousness must at least meet the definition of an ordinarily skilled artisan. The patent at issue related to a...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Tris Pharma, Inc. v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

Almost four years ago, in a relatively rare occurrence based on there being an insufficient factual record to permit proper appellate review, the Federal Circuit vacated a District Court decision rendering invalid the claims...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

The Federal Circuit recently granted a panel rehearing and vacated a panel decision between these parties decided earlier this year (see Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Accord Healthcare), and rendered a decision that...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Cornell Research Foundation, Inc. v. Vidal (Fed. Cir. 2022)

Last month in Cornell Research Foundation, Inc. v. Vidal, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's determinations in six inter partes review proceedings that invalidated the challenged claims for being...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Discussion of Inventors’ Path in Expert’s Obviousness Opinion Warrants Partial Exclusion in Bench Trial

In the weeks preceding a recent Hatch-Waxman bench trial, a district court excluded portions of an expert’s opinion on obviousness that addressed internal documents and inventor testimony concerning the “inventors’ path” to...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022: Split Panel Weighs General Skepticism Differently in Obviousness Inquiry

In a recent opinion by the Federal Circuit, Auris Health, Inc. v Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Case 2021-1732, the panel split on the weight of general industry skepticism in an obviousness analysis and split on...more

68 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"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