News & Analysis as of

Motion to Dismiss Patent Litigation Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs: August 2024

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: Federal Circuit Addresses Waiver of Argument Not Raised in Request for...more

McDermott Will & Emery

When Is It Really Over? If Additional Proceedings Are Needed, Judgment Is Not Final

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, factually distinguishing the concept of finality in this case from its earlier decision in Fresenius USA v. Baxter Int’l, vacated and remanded a district court’s amended final...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Struggling to Master the Alice Two-Step: Search Result Display Ineligible for Patent Protection

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a lawsuit involving two software patents directed toward enhancements to search result displays, finding that both patents claimed...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Should This Be an Alice Two-Step or a Section 112 Enablement Waltz?

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit for lack of subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 based on an Alice two-step analysis, with Judge Newman filing a sharp dissent...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Recharged and Ready to Go?

Phillip Morris can’t seem to catch its breath. As discussed in a previous post, just a few weeks ago the Federal Circuit upheld the ITC’s ban on the importation and sale of Phillip Morris’s line of heated tobacco and...more

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

2022 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends: US District Courts: A Busy Year for Design Patents, Including a $17M Jury...

Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more

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

2022 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more

Jones Day

Petition Survives Word Count Complaint And Request for Withdrawal

Jones Day on

The PTAB recently denied a motion to dismiss a Revised Petition and terminate an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding despite Petitioner’s alleged withdrawal of the Original Petition and failure to comply with the word limit...more

Jones Day

Board Requires Settlement Agreement to Dismiss Pre-Institution Proceeding

Jones Day on

Biofrontera AG (“Petitioner”) filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the petition during the preliminary phase of the proceedings.  Here, DUSA Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (“Patent Owner”) had not yet filed a Preliminary Response, and...more

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

Northern District of California Dismisses Challenge to PTAB’s Fintiv Factors

On Nov. 10, 2021, the Northern District of California granted the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Apple and co-plaintiffs challenging the Patent Trial and Appeal...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Chief Judge Stark Denies Defendants’ Motions To Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaints Asserting Patent Infringement Due To The Use Of...

Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Stragent, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 20-510-LPS (D.Del. March 25, 2021) (consolidated), the Court denied Defendants’ motions to...more

Jones Day

Apple v. Iancu: Oral Argument on Motion to Dismiss and Plaintiff Summary Judgment Motion

Jones Day on

Since the PTAB designated Apple v. Fintiv precedential, the six-factor, “holistic” test has been increasingly used to discretionarily deny institution of petitions challenging claims already subject to parallel litigation...more

Goodwin

Issue Twenty-Four: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Regents of the Univ. of Minn. v. LSI Corp., 926 F.3d 1327...

LSI and Ericsson petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several patents owned by the University of Minnesota (UMN). UMN moved to dismiss each IPR based on state sovereign immunity. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Knobbe Martens

Decision of PTAB to Reconsider Earlier Decision Instituting Inter Partes Review Is Not Reviewable by the Court of Appeals

Knobbe Martens on

BIODELIVERY SCIENCES INTL. v. AQUESTIVE THERAPEUTICS, INC. Before Newman, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Summary: The PTAB has the discretion to not institute inter partes...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2019

Knobbe Martens on

One-year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties that Become Privies of the Litigant Prior to Institution. In Power Integrations, Inc v. Semiconductor Components, Appeal No. 2018-1607, the Federal...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases - November 2018 #3

ArcelorMittal Atlantique Et Lorraine v. AK Steel Corporation, Appeal No. 2017-1637 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2018) - In an opinion originally filed as sealed on Nov. 5 and unsealed on Nov. 18, the Federal Circuit vacated and...more

Goodwin

Biosimilar Litigation Updates

Goodwin on

Below is an update on recent developments in several litigations involving biosimilar products. Amgen v. Sandoz (filgrastim, pegfilgrastim): As we previously reported, the district court granted summary judgment of...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2018

Knobbe Martens on

A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Judge Oetken Lifts Stay on 1 of 5 IPR’ed Patents

On April 5, 2018, Judge Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) granted Plaintiff Rovi Guides Inc.’s (“Rovi”) motion to lift a stay related to U.S. Patent No. 8,122,034 (“the ’034 patent”), only one of five patents at issue in a case that was...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - SimpleAir, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2016-2738 (Fed. Cir. 2018) - In SimpleAir, Inc. v Google LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, Appeal No. 2017-1842 (March 7, 2018) - In Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement as to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Discretion to Dismiss IPR Petition Pre-Institution - Samsung Elecs Co., Ltd v. NVIDIA Corp.

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing whether a petitioner seeking inter partes review (IPR) is entitled to withdraw its petition prior to an institution decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that where the petitioners...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IP Newsflash - September 2015 #4

DISTRICT COURT CASES - Judge Gilstrap, in the Eastern District of Texas, Grants Defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) Motions to Dismiss under 35 U.S.C. § 101 - On September 21, 2015, Judge Gilstrap in the Eastern District of...more

25 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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