News & Analysis as of

Joint Inventors

Goodwin

Acuitas File Complaint Against Alnylam for Declaratory Judgment of Co-Inventorship of Lipid Particle Patents

Goodwin on

Acuitas Therapeutics Inc. (“Acuitas”) filed a complaint (1-24-cv-00816) on July 12 against Alnylam Pharmaceutical Inc. (“Alnylam”) in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging incorrect inventorship of...more

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC

Independent Inventor Pitfalls: Incorrect Inventorship And Why You Should Correct It

Naming a person who is not a proper inventor on your non-provisional patent application can be a costly, time-consuming error to fix, and if not fixed ultimately results in an invalid patent. Typically, time and money are two...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

No Joint Inventorship When Contribution Is Insignificant in Quality Compared to Main Invention

In Hip, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corp., the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, held that there was no joint inventorship when the contribution of preheating meat pieces using an infrared oven was insignificant in quality...more

Strafford

[Webinar] Patent Inventorship: Best Practices for Determination and Correction - Distinguishing Between Inventor and Contributor;...

Strafford on

This CLE course will guide patent counsel in identifying and determining inventorship and offer best practices for correcting errors regarding inventorship. Our experienced panel will provide perspectives gained from working...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Who Solved the Problem? Joint Inventors, That’s Who

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to correct inventorship in a post-issuance inventorship dispute, finding that the alleged joint inventors’ contributions were significant...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Same Product in Different Packaging May Constitute Separate Market for Antitrust Purposes

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing an issue of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that two medications that contain the same ingredients but are packaged in different forms constitute separate markets for...more

Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig PLLC

USPTO Guidance On The Impact Of Artificial Intelligence On Patent Inventorship

On February 12, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released guidance and a solicitation for public comments on assessing inventorship in the context of inventions aided by artificial intelligence...more

Jones Day

USPTO Issues New Guidance for Inventions Assisted by Artificial Intelligence: Human Contribution Is Key

Jones Day on

The Background: In response to the Biden administration's "Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence" on October 30, 2023, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

HIP Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corp. No. 2022-1696, _ F.4th ___ (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2023)

This case addresses the requirements necessary to establish a prima facie case to correct inventorship under 35 U.S.C. § 256. Background - Hormel Foods appealed the District Court’s ruling that David Howard should be...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Inventorship Hosed Clean: Contribution, Corroboration and Collaboration Prove Joint Invention

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision to correct inventorship, finding that the alleged joint inventor’s contribution to a claimed invention was significant and adequately corroborated by...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Blue Gentian’s Efforts to Maintain Sole Inventorship Were Hosed by the Federal Circuit

Last week, the Federal Circuit issued another precedential decision on inventorship. However, unlike in HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corporation (22-1696) where the appellate panel found the purported inventor’s contribution to...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Contributions to Patented Cooking Method Not Meaty Enough for Joint Inventorship

The Federal Circuit has reversed the District of Delaware’s ruling that added an inventor to a patent. The Federal Circuit found that the contribution by the added inventor was not significant when measured against the...more

Woods Rogers

The Legal Ramifications of Inventorship: What You Need To Know

Woods Rogers on

There is the old adage in business: to go fast, go alone; and to go far, go together.  When this applies to innovation and naming co-inventors in your patent application, it is important to understand the legal ramification...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Last Week In The Federal Circuit (May 15 – May 19): Joint Inventorship and Insignificant Contributions

This week’s bacon-related case of the week may lack a certain recognizable savory smell, but it still manages to pack some helpful insights on the law of joint inventorship. Case of the (recent) week: HIP, Inc. v. Hormel...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: IPR petitioner not required to anticipate and raise analogous art arguments in petition

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - HIP, INC. v. HORMEL FOODS CORPORATION (2022-1696, 5/2/23) (Lourie, Clevenger, and Taranto) Lourie, J. The Court reversed the district court’s decision regarding joint...more

Irwin IP LLP

Federal Circuit Cooks District Court’s Decision to Add Bacon-Prep Inventor

Irwin IP LLP on

This week, the Federal Circuit reversed the United States District Court for the District of Delaware’s (“District Court”) decision to add David Howard as a joint inventor on Hormel Food Corporation’s (“Hormel”) U.S. Patent...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Making Bacon Still Requires a Significant Contribution for Joint Inventorship

Last week, in Hip, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corporation, No. 2022-1696 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2023), the Federal Circuit reversed Delaware District Chief Judge Colm F. Connolly’s decision to add an unnamed inventor onto a patent for...more

McDermott Will & Emery

What’s Shakin’ Bacon? Not Inventorship—Contribution to Invention Can’t Be “Insignificant”

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court decision and found that an asserted inventor not named in the application was not a joint inventor because in the context of the entire invention his...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Bacon and a Heavy Burden: Significant Contribution Required To Be a Joint Inventor

Efforts by HIP, Inc. to have David Howard added as an inventor to Hormel’s U.S. Patent No. 9,980,498 (Bacon Patent) were recently scorched by the Federal Circuit. More specifically, in HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corporation...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases, May 2023

HIP, Inc. v. Hormel Foods Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1696 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2023) In its only precedential patent opinion this week, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court determination that David Howard should be...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., 34 F.4th 1081...

Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...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

Swing and a Miss: Failed Interferences Don’t Affect Later Ones

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s (Board) interference decision finding that priority belonged to the junior party based on sufficiently corroborated reduction to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Challenging Inventorship on Summary Judgment? Put a Cap on It

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, citing a dispute as to material facts, held that a factfinder could reasonably conclude that an alleged joint inventor failed to sufficiently contribute to inventing the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

BASF Plant Science, LP v. Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (Fed. Cir. 2022)

The consequences of joint development agreements, particularly under circumstances where later development is pursued independently by the parties, can create, inter alia, allegations of improper ownership and infringement if...more

58 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