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 a recent decision, the PTAB determined that images of products offered for sale via online retailers, such as Amazon, did not alone qualify as printed publications—even if the images showed the product and the date it was...more
Parkervision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1755, 2024-2221 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 6, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit weighed in again on a 13-year-old patent dispute concerning Qualcomm’s...more
The recent case involving United Therapeutics' patent on Tyvaso and Liquidia's Yutrepia sheds light on the complexities of patent law. The Federal Circuit's initial infringement finding, followed by the Patent Trial and...more
In Pfizer Inc., v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., SK Chems Co. Ltd., v. Vidal, 2019-1871 (March 5, 2024), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s conclusions that claims 1–45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 were unpatentable due to...more
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
Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., Appeal No. 2024-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2024) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit clarifies rules relating to when an applicant’s patent can be...more
This decision emphasizes the significance of broader public dissemination to meet the statutory requirement of “publicly disclosed” for purposes of exceptions to prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(B)....more
Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd., Appeal No. 2022-2216 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 6, 2024) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit confirmed the invalidity of all claims of two asserted patents as...more
Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Technology International Limited Inc., Appeal No. 2023-1336 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit held that the private but non-confidential sale of thousands of...more
Before Bryson, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”), Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”). Summary: Estoppel under 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i) only applies to obtaining new...more
ZyXEL Communications Corp. v. UNM Rainforest Innovations, Nos. 2022-2220, -2250 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) July 22, 2024). Opinion by Dyk, joined by Prost and Stark. UNMRI owns a patent that relates to methods for constructing frame...more
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: Design Patent Obviousness Test Thrown Out - The U.S. Court of Appeals...more
On June 14, 2024, the PTAB issued a Final Written Decision (FWD) in Samsung Bioepis’s IPR2023-00442 (“the -00442 IPR) determining that the challenged claims of Regeneron’s U.S. Patent No. 10,130,681 (the ’681 patent) that...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has seen a steady increase in the invalidation rate of patents in the past five years, reaching 71% for the first two quarters of 2024. In 2023, challenged claims were invalidated 68%...more
In In re Cellect, 81 F.4th 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2023), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a later-expiring patent can be invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) in view of an earlier-expiring,...more
In Ioengine, LLC v. Ingenico Inc. No. 2021-1227, 2021-1331, 2021-1332 (Fed. Cir. May 03, 2024), the case addresses the patentability/validity of three patents. In particular, this case discusses the application of the printed...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently made a notable pair of decisions invalidating patents held by Wildseed Mobile LLC as obvious over art asserted by Google. Wildseed Mobile, a mobile technology company,...more
On appeal from an interference proceeding, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision that found the claims of the senior party’s patent were not invalid as time-barred...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - LKQ CORPORATION v. GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC [OPINION] (2021-2348, 5/21/24) Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, and Stark - Stoll,...more
Before Lourie, Hughes, and Stark. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: An infringement judgment is only sufficiently “final” to be immune from a later finding of unpatentability if...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. IOENGINE, LLC V. VIDAL (21-1227 Lourie, Chen, Stoll) - Chen, J. The Court reversed in part and affirmed in part the Final Written Decisions of the Patent Trial and...more
The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This periodic digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more
Being sued for patent infringement in the U.S. can be confusing, especially for foreign companies with limited litigation experience. Even more confusing are the multiple options and venues available for responding to patent...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and vacated in part a Patent Trial & Appeal Board finding that the claims at issue were either invalid under 35 U.S.C. §112 as unsupported by written...more
As any PTAB practitioner knows, the possibility of being estopped from asserting prior art in district court is a significant risk that must be considered when filing an IPR. Section 315(e)(2) prevents a petitioner, following...more