Third Party Observation in Patent Prosecution in China
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Cases Updated in CNIPA Guidelines - Eligibility & Inventiveness for AI & Business Method Applications
Five Impactful USPTO Procedural Developments for Patent Practitioners
Podcast: Patentable Subject Matter in 2019
On December 22, 2022, the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) announced the fifth extension of the Modified COVID-19 Prioritized Examination Pilot Program. The pilot program had been set to terminate on December 31, 2022, and...more
In the practice of patent examination in China, to determine whether an invention has prominent substantive features is to determine, to the person skilled in the art, whether the claimed invention is non-obvious as compared...more
CHUDIK V. HIRSHFELD - Before Taranto, Bryson, and Hughes. Appeal from the United State District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia - Summary: An examiner’s self-reversal may not qualify as “reversing an...more
Google applied for a patent on video-on-demand systems. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board affirmed the examiner’s rejection of the claims as obvious, stating that Google’s responses to the examiner’s rejections were...more
It can be difficult to advance prosecution of a U.S. patent application efficiently and effectively after prosecution has been closed and an Advisory Action has been mailed. Various U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)...more
This week, in Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Iancu, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia granting summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Patent and Trademark...more
2019 was an eventful year in the Chinese IP landscape, with a large number of major developments shaking up existing practice, and with important overhauls of laws and regulations....more
A recent decision by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit suggests that petitioners who unsuccessfully challenge patents in an inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) cannot rely on...more
Amgen, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmas. LLC et al - Before Newman, Lourie, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: An examiner amendment may give rise to prosecution history...more
The Appointments Clause: Ensuring That PTAB Decisions Are Subject to Constitutional Checks and Balances In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2251, the Federal Circuit ruled that, under the then-existing...more
AIRBUS S.A.S. v. FIREPASS CORPORATION Before Lourie, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Whether an asserted prior art reference is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem...more
Claim construction for a design patent is mainly focused on the drawings, which show the ornamental design that is protected by the patent. But the Federal Circuit recently identified one situation where the drawings weren’t...more
Sometimes appealing an Examiner’s rejection is the only practical option. If no claims of valuable scope have been allowed or indicated as allowable, and all clarifying claim amendments, supporting evidence and salient...more
INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC v. IANCU - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: If a proper reply to a final Office Action is not...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Inspired Development Grp, LLC v. Inspired Products Grp., LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1616 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 18, 2019) - Our first patent case of the week is not, according to the Federal Circuit, a...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Chen, Mayer, and Bryson. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claims directed to the abstract idea of rules for playing a dice game are not transformed into patent...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Reyna, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada Summary: District Courts have jurisdiction to hear APA challenges to the PTO’s denial...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Newman, Clevenger and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: Prosecution history estoppel does not bar enforcement of a...more
Federal Circuit Summary - En Banc (excl. Chen), Opinion for the court filed by Stoll, joined by Newman, Lourie, Moore, O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District...more
On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit ruled that a patent applicant’s obligation to pay the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) “expenses” for district court proceedings to review patent application rejections does not...more
The Federal Circuit decision in In re Durance is a rare precedential decision in an ex parte appeal from a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision rejecting a pending patent application. The Court took the USPTO to task...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Lourie, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). Summary: Nothing in § 41.41(b)(2) bars a reply brief from addressing new arguments raised in the...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
In many instances, using a particular process results in an innovative consumer product. It only makes sense that patent claims covering these innovative products may use terms or phrases related to the process (e.g.,...more
As the law regarding patent eligibility for certain subject matter continues to evolve, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently clarified its examination procedure relating to subject matter eligibility in a...more