Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
The Briefing: A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Podcast: The Briefing - A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
In two recent decisions, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings sought by Apple Inc. against Haptic, Inc. regarding U.S. Patent No. 9,996,738 B2. These...more
Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) was persuaded to consider the merits of three out of seven concurrent petitions for an inter partes review of a single patent due to the patent’s complicated claiming...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more
Who Bears the Burden of Proof for IPR Estoppel? In Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corp., Appeal No. 21-2296, the Federal Circuit held that the patentee has the burden of proving that invalidity grounds not raised in a...more
Caltech sued Broadcom and Apple for infringement, asserting three of its data transmission patents against Broadcom’s WiFi chips and certain Apple products that incorporate those chips. Apple then filed IPR petitions...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
On February 4, 2022, the Federal Circuit clarified that IPR estoppel extends to all claims and invalidity grounds that the petitioner could have reasonably asserted in its IPR petition. ...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Apple Inc. v. Voip-Pal.com, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1456, -1457 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 25, 2020) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed two novel issues following inter partes review...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeal No. 2019-1169, -1260 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020) - Our case of the week concerns issues particular to inter partes review...more
In Apple v. Uniloc 2017 LLC, the patent owner moved to amend the claims contingent on an unpatentability finding by the Board. The contingent amendment cancelled the original claims and replaced them with a new claim set. The...more
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
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Encompasses All Embodiments in the Absence of Support Specifically Excluding an Embodiment - In Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Nestle USA, Inc., Appeal No. 2017-1290, the Federal Circuit...more
Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more
Medtronic, Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare (No. 2015-1977, -1986, -1987, 10/20/16) (Lourie, Dyk, Hughes) - Dyk, J. Denying petition for rehearing and confirming the Court's earlier order. “The Board's vacatur of its...more
All patent practitioners recognize that a single prior art reference can be used to reject claims in an obviousness rejection. However, the issue is whether the Patent Office must provide additional evidence, above and beyond...more
ScriptPro LLC v. Innovation Associates, Inc. (No. 2015-1565, 8/15/16) (Moore, Taranto, Hughes) - August 15, 2016 10:41 AM - Moore, J. Reversing summary judgment of invalidity of claims for lack of written...more
The Federal Circuit Will Review Appeals from Inter Partes Review Proceedings Under the “Substantial Evidence” Standard - In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A., Appeal No. 2014-1779, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB IPR...more
SUPREME AND FEDERAL COURT CASES - U.S. Supreme Court Denies Writ to Overturn Application of the Kessler Doctrine - The U.S. Supreme Court denied software developer’s SpeedTrack writ to overturn the Federal...more
The Federal Circuit has again held that it lacks jurisdiction to review certain decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial & Appeal Board in Inter Partes Reviews, continuing the Court’s apparent “hands off” approach to reviewing PTAB...more
When inter partes review (IPR) proceedings became effective in September 2012, few people would have predicted the transformative effect it would have on patents and the litigation landscape. Three years in, IPR has become...more
In a trio of orders addressing the extent of express explanation required in a petition for post-grant review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found each petition defective for lack of explanation regarding...more
DISTRICT COURT CASES - District Court Required Identification of Prior Art in Defendant’s Counterclaim of Invalidity - In the Southern District of New York, the court granted plaintiff’s motion to dismiss...more