New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Noteworthy Points in the Rules for the Implementation of China's Patent Law 2023
5 Key Takeaways | Best Practices in Patent Drafting: Addressing 112 and Enablement after Amgen
Third Party Observation in Patent Prosecution in China
Building a Cost-Effective Global Patent Portfolio Using the Netherlands
Greater Speed and Efficiency: Steps IP Offices Around the World Are Taking to Streamline the Patent Process
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Patent Dual-application Strategy in China
Conflicting Application in China’s Patent System
New and Non-Obvious: The Nuts-and-Bolts Episode on Patent Law
5 Key Takeaways | Current Perspectives Around the Convergence of Life Sciences and IT
What You Should Know About Seeking Patent Protection in Vietnam
In Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technology International Limited, Inc, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision finding obvious all challenged claims of the ‘429 patent, which relates to a device that provides ports for...more
In a precedential opinion issued on April 11, 2024 in Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc., Nos. 22-2153, 23-1952, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for...more
Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. Lindsey Laurain, Appeal Nos. 2022-1905, -1970 (Fed. Cir. Apr.12, 2024) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s bench trial decision that unclean hands...more
In Apple Inc. v. DoDots Licensing Sols. LLC, IPR2023-00939, Paper 12 (PTAB Jan. 3, 2024) (“Decision”), the PTAB clarified what is and what is not part of the prior art, and as such what can be considered by the PTAB in an IPR...more
In a recent decision, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board found that the disputed claims regarding transferring digital content were not unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) after determining that the prior art cited by the...more
A patent does not give the owner the right to do anything. Rather, it gives the patent owner the right to exclude others from making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing the claimed invention, which most...more
The Background: There has been a growing trend to invalidate European patents by challenging their formal priority and using intervening prior art. The Technical Boards of Appeal of the European Patent Office ("EPO") referred...more
Although provisional applications can be used to secure an earlier date for 102(e), the petitioner bears the burden of production in establishing a prior art date for the asserted prior art. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
Ascertaining the differences between prior art and claims at issue requires interpreting the claim language and considering both the invention and the prior art references as a whole. The Supreme Court emphasized “the need...more
Patent owners know that competitors can challenge their patents in the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). These challenges, known as inter partes reviews (IPRs), were created with the goal of improving patent quality....more
In LG Electronics Inc. v. Immervision, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that an obvious error in a prior art reference was not considered a teaching. The court explained that a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would...more
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
Speakers will offer updates, case summaries, and analysis of the significant 2022 PTAB guidance, actions, and rulings. Topics include: the Director’s 2022 Fintiv guidance, PTAB discretionary denial, the use of applicant...more
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
We are committed to providing insightful commentary on IP developments from around the world to our Japanese clients. In light of that effort, we are continuing our free monthly webinar series, McDermott IP Focus. During...more
Proof of prior art is an issue that often arises in inter partes and post grant review proceedings before the PTAB. In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit explained the quantum of proof that is required to establish prior...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
The Board denied post grant review in Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, Inc. under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) after applying the Advanced Bionics framework as informed by the factors outlined in Becton. IPR2021-01520...more
Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox invites you to the webinar, "PTAB Analysis, Trends, and Forecast: Fintiv and Discretionary Denials," on Monday, March 21, 2022, from 1:00 to 2:00 PM (EDT). In conjunction with the release...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
INDIVIOR UK LIMITED v. DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES S.A. Before Lourie, Linn, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claims of a continuation application were anticipated because they were not...more
Joint inventorship has been called "one of the muddiest concepts in the muddy metaphysics of patent law" because the "exact parameters of what constitutes joint inventorship are quite difficult to define." Mueller Brass Co....more
Arguments to the Patent Office That Contradict Information Submitted to the FDA Support an Inference of Deceptive Intent In Belcher Pharmaceuticals v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal No. 20-1799, the Federal Circuit held that a...more