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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
AntennaSys, Inc. v. AQYR Techs., Inc., Appeal No. 2019-2244 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2020) - In the only precedential opinion issued by the Federal Circuit this week, the Court declined to reach the merits of a judgment of...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., Appeal No. 2019-1527 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 27, 2020) - In this week’s Case of the Week, an appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware,...more
Addressing an inventorship decision that added two co-inventors to patents covering cancer treatments, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed that the co-inventors’ work constituted joint inventorship even...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc. v. Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2019-2050 (Fed. Cir. July 14, 2020) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed inventorship...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for N.D. Ohio. Summary: On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a district court cannot judicially notice facts that are subject to...more
In a combined opinion, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed appeals from district court grants of summary judgment over two patents, and an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that one of...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Duncan Parking Techs., Inc. v. IPS Group, Inc. and IPS Group, Inc. v. Duncan Solutions, Inc. et al., Appeal Nos. 2018-1205, -1360 (Fed. Cir. January 31, 2019) - The Court this week provided a...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Lourie, Dyk and Taranto. Consolidated Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Southern District of California. Summary: A person is a joint inventor of the anticipating...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, Mayer, and Lourie. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: An application is unpatentable under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(f) when the application does not name...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, O’Malley, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Summary: A co-inventor did not transfer ownership interests in a...more
U.S. patent law elevates the importance of “the inventor” to an extent unseen in the rest of the world. Unlike many other countries, ownership of patent applications in the United States initially vests in the inventors...more
In SCA v. First Quality Baby Products, the Supreme Court holds that laches should not be available as a defense in patent cases, refusing to concur with the Circuit’s en banc holding that the Patent Act’s 6-year limitation on...more