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
Samsung successfully petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of several of Papst’s patents, including U.S. Patent No. 9,189,437. Prior to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding the claims of the ’437 patent...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
On May 24, 2018, Apple was awarded a verdict of $533 million for Samsung’s infringement of three Apple design patents. While unsuccessful ex parte reexaminations (EPRs) were filed against two of those three design patents,...more
In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, the meaning of terms used in challenged claims of an unexpired patent are given their broadest reasonable interpretation in light of the claim language and the specification. The...more
On Friday March 3, 2016, in a decision in cases brought by Samsung Bioepsis UK Ltd. and Fujifilm Kyowa Kirin Biologics Co. Ltd., a U.K. court held invalid two European patents owned by Abbvie that purportedly cover Humira®...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
In another twist of fortunes in the long-running smartphone patent war between Apple and Samsung, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has once again overturned Apple’s patent infringement jury verdict – this...more
DISTRICT COURT CASES - Judge Gilstrap, in the Eastern District of Texas, Grants Defendants’ Rule 12(b)(6) Motions to Dismiss under 35 U.S.C. § 101 - On September 21, 2015, Judge Gilstrap in the Eastern District of...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
Accused Infringer’s Good-Faith Belief In Invalidity No Defense To Induced Infringement - In Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., No. 13-896, the Supreme Court held a good-faith belief a patent is invalid is not a...more