News & Analysis as of

Indefiniteness

Ervin Cohen & Jessup LLP

Patents Must Describe the “How” - A Reminder That Functional Claims Need Structural Support

On April 30, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Fintiv, Inc. v. PayPal Holdings, Inc. (No. 23-2312), issued on April 30, 2025, upholding the invalidation of Finitiv Inc.’s (“Finitiv”) mobile wallet patents related...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Judge Engelmayer Gets a Handle on “BlenderBottle” Patent Claims and Rejects Assertion of Indefiniteness

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer (S.D.N.Y.) recently construed claim terms at issue in a patent litigation between Plaintiffs Trove Brands, LLC, d/b/a The BlenderBottle Company, and Runway Blue, LLC (collectively, “Trove”) and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Payment Handler”: A Nonce Term Without Instructions

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that a software term was a “nonce” term that invoked 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph (i.e., a means-plus-function claim element). The Court...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Claims May Bend But Are Not Broken: Judge Locke Rejects Indefiniteness Arguments in Fiber Optic Cables Case

In a patent-infringement case involving fiber-optic-cable assemblies, Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke (E.D.N.Y.) recently rejected defendants’ arguments that two terms in the patent claims were indefinite under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Fintiv, Inc. v. Paypal holdings, Inc.

Fintiv, Inc. v. Paypal holdings, Inc., Appeal No. 2023-2312 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 30, 2025) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s determination that the terms “payment...more

Knobbe Martens

An Obvious Solution to an Unknown Problem?

Knobbe Martens on

IMMUNOGEN, INC. v. STEWART - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Prost. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. A solution to a problem can be obvious even when the problem itself was unknown in...more

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

Sterne Kessler’s Reissue, Reexamination, and Supplemental Examination Practice Tips – January 2025

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

Smart & Biggar

Canadian patent law 2024: a year in review

Smart & Biggar on

2024 was an active year in Canadian patent law, with the Federal Court issuing several decisions on the merits regarding invalidity and/or infringement. The courts also considered issues of the regulation of patent agents,...more

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

2024 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: District Court Design Patent Cases: A Busy Year of Case Filings

2024 was another busy year for district court decisions! There were multiple jury trials, case-dispositive design patent decisions, and claim construction decisions across a range of venues and at a range of case postures. We...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Clarifies That The Meaning Of A Claim Term Can Vary While Still Remaining Consistent

A&O Shearman on

On September 16, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued an opinion vacating and remanding a decision from the District Court of Minnesota which held the asserted claims of medical...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - September 2024 #3

Vascular Solutions LLC v. Medtronic, Inc., Appeal No. 24-1398 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit evaluated certain heavily litigated claims directed to guide catheters. The patents...more

WilmerHale

Disclosure of Antibody’s Equivalents Not Necessary to Satisfy Written Description and Indefiniteness Requirements for a...

WilmerHale on

The United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) Appeals Review Panel (“the Panel”) recently clarified that means-plus-function claims do not require that the specification disclose equivalents. See Ex parte...more

Goodwin

The Appeals Review Panel’s In Re Xencor Decision: The USPTO Provides Its Position on Written Description and Means-Plus-Function...

Goodwin on

On May 17, 2024, an Appeals Review Panel (ARP) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) released its decision in Ex parte Chamberlain (referred to in Federal Circuit proceedings as In re Xencor;...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: District Court’s “Seemingly Siloed and Inflexible Approach” to Obviousness “Ran Afoul” of KSR

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1.  JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. [OPINION] (2022-1258, 2022-1307, 4/1/2024) (Dyk, Prost, and Hughes) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed...more

Goodwin

Janssen v. Teva: Not an April Fool’s Day Joke for Life Sciences Companies

Goodwin on

On April 1, 2024 the Federal Circuit released its opinion in Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. et al v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al., affirming the district court’s finding that certain claims were not indefinite and...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | March 2024

Knobbe Martens on

Defining Indefiniteness: When Are Claim Limitations Contradictory? In Maxell, Ltd., v. Amperex Technology Limited, Appeal No. 23-1194, the Federal Circuit held that  two claim limitations are not contradictory if they...more

McDermott Will & Emery

That’s So Metal: Narrow Limitation Doesn’t Contradict Broader One

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s indefiniteness determination, finding that two claim limitations – one broad and one narrow – were not contradictory since it was possible to meet...more

Fish & Richardson

ITC Monthly Wrap-Up: February 2024

Fish & Richardson on

In February, the International Trade Commission (ITC) instituted three new Section 337 investigations: Certain Oil Vaporizing Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing the Same, 337-TA-1392; Certain Network...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

Indefinite Contradiction or Inartful Claim Narrowing?

Earlier today the Federal Circuit in Maxell v. Amperex, No. 23-1194, vacated a District Court’s indefiniteness determination after distinguishing an indefinite patent claim having contradictory claim limitations from a patent...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

“Inelegant” Language Does Not an Indefinite Claim Term Make

To follow up on my February 6, 2024 post, Federal Circuit Judges Prost, Taranto, and Chen heard oral argument on February 9, 2024 in Maxell v. Amperex, No. 23-1194, concerning a claim term that the District Court had found...more

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

2023 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: U.S. District Courts: Significant Design Patent Cases on District Court...

2023 was another busy year for district court decisions! There were patent- and case-dispositive design patent decisions across a range of venues and at a range of case postures, including claim construction rulings, summary...more

Freiberger Haber LLP

Second Department Holds That Material Term of Contract For Sale of Real Property (i.e., the Property Description) Was Too...

Freiberger Haber LLP on

This BLOG has written numerous times on issues related to contract formation. See, e.g., [here], [here], [here], [here] and [here]. Briefly stated, “[t]o create a binding contract, there must be a manifestation of mutual...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

“A”/“An” Means “One or More,” Said the Federal Circuit…Again

18 8 In ABS Global, Inc. v. Cytonome/ST, LLC, No. 2022-1761, 2023 WL 6885009 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 19, 2023), the Federal Circuit issued a precedential reminder that the use of “a” or “an” means “one or more” in an open-ended claim...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Recently in the Federal Circuit: More on Indefiniteness in IPRs

Means-plus-function claim elements can be a sticky wicket during an inter partes review, to borrow a phrase from the cricket lovers out there. These are claim elements drafted under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f) (or its predecessor...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2023 #2

Finjan LLC v. SonicWall, Inc., Appeal No. 2022-1048 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2023) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential opinion this week, a majority affirmed summary judgment of non-infringement on appellant Finjan’s...more

276 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 12

"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