News & Analysis as of

Patent Applications Obviousness Intellectual Property Protection

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending April 4, 2025

Alston & Bird on

In re: Forest, No. 2023-1178 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Apr. 3, 2025). Opinion by Chen, joined by Taranto and Schall.  In 2016, an inventor filed a patent application that claimed priority to an application filed in 1995. The Patent...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Riggs

In re: Riggs, Appeal No. 2022-1945 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025) Our Case of the Week explores the power of an examiner to request a rehearing after the Board has entered a decision on an application. The case also relates to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Inventor’s Motivation to Combine Does Not Control Obviousness

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision rejecting claims of a patent application directed to a dosing regimen for a cancer treatment, finding the claims to be obvious where the...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Leveraging USPTO Delays To Maximize Patent Term

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Before the USPTO was subject to a hiring freeze, it assumed it would onboard 400 new examiners between fiscal year 2025 and fiscal year 2026, and still predicted an increase in the backlog of unexamined patent applications....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners

Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1475, -1533 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 4, 2025) Our Case of the Week is a high-stakes appeal from an inter partes review concerning a patent titled “Camera Based...more

Alston & Bird

Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | February 2025

Alston & Bird on

Welcome to the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, our review of decisions and trends in the intellectual property arena. In this edition, we learn that the Federal Circuit always says never, patent publications...more

Smart & Biggar

Avoiding the hindsight trap in the context of a patent obviousness analysis

Smart & Biggar on

While courts have often warned that hindsight bias should be avoided when assessing whether a patented invention would have been obvious to the skilled person, the application of this principle can be challenging in practice....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | January 2025

Knobbe Martens on

In Honeywell International Inc. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., Appeal No. 23-1354, the Federal Circuit held that under the obviousness standard of 35 U.S.C. § 103, the motivation to modify prior art does not need to be the same as...more

Hudnell Law Group

Published but not Public? Federal Circuit Confirms Published Patent Applications Count as Prior Art from Filing Date in IPRs.

Hudnell Law Group on

On January 14, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., No. 23-2346 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 14, 2025), addressing whether a...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - January 2025 #3

Bearbox LLC v. Lancium LLC, Appeal No. 2023-1922 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 13, 2025) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s determination that appellants Bearbox and Austin Storms—Bearbox’s...more

Jones Day

When Is a Published Patent Application Prior Art in an IPR?

Jones Day on

On appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”), the Federal Circuit held that, under pre-America Invents Act (“pre-AIA”) law, a published patent application is prior art as of its filing date as opposed to its later date of...more

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

Published Application Art at the PTAB: Lynk Labs v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd.

In Lynk Labs, Inc., v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the Federal Circuit reinforced that patent applications may serve as prior art in IPR proceedings as of their filing date—even where those applications were not published...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

A POSA’s Motivation Is Not Required To Be the Same as the Inventor’s in Evaluating Obviousness

In its first precedential opinion of 2025, Honeywell v. 3G Licensing, No. 2023-1354, the Federal Circuit held that a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA) needs not to have the same motivation as the inventor in an...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Emphasizes Role of Filing Dates, Reversing Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Invalidation

In Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 2024-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2024), the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court of Delaware’s invalidity determination of certain claims of U.S. Patent No....more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Reviewing 2024's Crucial Patent Law Developments

As 2024 draws to a close, several crucial developments — some aimed at modernizing long-standing legal practices, others addressing emerging challenges — have reached patent law. Originally published in Law360 - December...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Christmas Came Early – USPTO Withdraws Proposed Rule on Terminal Disclaimers

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

Patent owners with robust continuation filing strategies can breathe a sigh of relief as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has withdrawn a proposed rule, which would have weakened patents linked to one...more

Jones Day

PTAB Issues First Post-LKQ Design Patent Decision

Jones Day on

On August 6, 2024, the PTAB issued its first written decision applying a new test for obviousness of design patents. In Next Step Group, Inc. v. Deckers Outdoor Corp., IPR2024-00525, Paper 16 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 6, 2024)...more

Smart & Biggar

[Webinar] Cross-border IP strategies for IP owners and litigators - September 18th, 2:00 pm PDT

Smart & Biggar on

Explore skinny labelling & obviousness in Canada and Australia - If you are an intellectual property (IP) owner, a litigator or an in-house legal professional managing IP litigation in multiple jurisdictions, don’t miss...more

Smart & Biggar

[Webinar] Cross-border IP strategies for IP owners and litigators - September 12th, 12:00 pm GMT

Smart & Biggar on

Explore skinny labelling & obviousness in Canada and Australia - If you are an intellectual property (IP) owner, a litigator or an in-house legal professional managing IP litigation in multiple jurisdictions, don’t miss...more

Cooley LLP

Federal Circuit Limits In re Cellect, Preserving PTA for First-Filed, First-Issued Patents Within a Family

Cooley LLP on

On August 13, 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Allergan v. MSN that “a first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim” cannot be invalidated for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) “by a...more

Kilpatrick

First-filed, Later-Expiring Patent Protected from Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Post In re Cellect

Kilpatrick on

The recent In re Cellect decision by the Federal Circuit1 is significant for patent owners who have obtained patent-term adjusted patents in the same patent family. The court held that term-adjusted patents can be potentially...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast

Troutman Pepper Locke on

Please join our Intellectual Property and Health Sciences practice groups for our podcast series focused on strategies, trends, and other happenings in post-grant proceedings. In this episode, Troutman Pepper Partners Andy...more

WilmerHale

Feeding and Generating AI Creates Patent Application Challenges

WilmerHale on

The explosion of artificial intelligence has raised some challenging questions in patent law, particularly with prior art, or the body of knowledge available prior to the filing of patent application. Two of the most...more

Strafford

[Webinar] Design Patents Post-LKQ v. GM: Navigating New Obviousness Test for Design Patents - July 10th, 1:00 pm - 2:30 pm EDT

Strafford on

This CLE webinar will guide patent counsel on the Federal Circuit's recent decision in LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations L.L.C. (May 21, 2024) and its implications for design patents. The panel will discuss the new...more

Fenwick & West LLP

USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice

Fenwick & West LLP on

On May 9, the USPTO released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for significant changes to terminal disclaimers. The USPTO suggests adding a new requirement that applicants can overcome an obviousness-type double patenting...more

55 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