What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Wolf Greenfield’s New Shareholders
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Tonia Sayour in the Spotlight
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The legal landscape quaked, and clients and counsel continue to navigate the tremors. More than 40 years of precedent was upended in May 2024 when a federal circuit court struck down the Rosen-Durling test for assessing...more
Recently, Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that defendant’s motion to dismiss pro se plaintiff Andrew Walker, Jr.’s (“Walker”) Second Amended Complaint be granted for lack of...more
The landscape of design patent law has recently evolved with the introduction of a new standard for determining obviousness. For decades, the Rosen-Durling test was used to assess obviousness of design patents....more
On March 5, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, No. 23-1245, vacating in part the International Trade Commission’s (ITC) determination that...more
For decades, the ITC’s jurisdictional requirement – known as the domestic industry requirement – effectively shut out innovators from availing themselves of the powerful remedies of the forum, in the form of an exclusion...more
2024 brought exciting developments at the Federal Circuit. The court issued its first en banc decision in a patent case in five years in LKQ, which significantly altered the standard for proving obviousness of a design...more
The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) remains a pivotal forum for addressing intellectual property disputes under Section 337, particularly those involving design patents. Although the Commission issued no remedial...more
2024 was another busy year for district court decisions! There were multiple jury trials, case-dispositive design patent decisions, and claim construction decisions across a range of venues and at a range of case postures. We...more
The majority of 2024 was a quiet year for design patent cases at the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court issued five opinions involving U.S. design patents: one Rule 36(a) affirmance, two decisions involving...more
As we predicted in our 2023 report, 2024 was a banner year for design rights in the U.S. and elsewhere. In last year’s report, we noted that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) agreed to consider en banc...more
From potential legal challenges to Chinese biopharma supply chains, Europe’s new Unified Patent Court (UPC), landmark decisions in life sciences, pharma’s Orange Book listings, design patent rejections, and likely shifts at...more
Please join Fitch Even for a free webinar, “Navigating the Changes to the Test for Obviousness in Design Patents After LKQ Corp. v. GM Global,” on Tuesday, October 29, at 9:00 a.m. PDT / 10:00 a.m. MDT / 11:00 a.m. CDT / 12...more
The Federal Circuit overturned its 42-year-old obviousness test for designs. Fashion companies, take note. The shape of a handbag, the red sole of a shoe: for fashion companies, design patents have long played a role in...more
In the world of furniture design, aesthetics often play as crucial a role as functionality since the unique appearance of a furniture piece can set it apart in a competitive marketplace and help establish a brand’s identity....more
Ten Section 337 Investigations were terminated in the first half of 2024. Of those ten investigations, two involved design patents. Although those investigations ended with the Commission issuing no remedial orders (including...more
A recent Federal Circuit decision overturning the long-standing obviousness test for design patents could have wide-ranging implications for design patent owners. The en banc decision in LKQ Corp. et al v. GM Global...more
Before Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, and Stark. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more
On May 21, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled more than 40 years of precedent defining the design patent obviousness standard. The decision eliminates the Rosen-Durling test,...more
On May 21, 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an en banc opinion overruling the long-standing Rosen-Durling test for obviousness of design patents in favor of the analytical framework used for...more
On May 21, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled its longstanding test used to assess the obviousness of design patents....more
On Tuesday, the en banc Federal Circuit released its highly anticipated decision in LKQ v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, rejecting as “improperly rigid” the previous standard for evaluating whether a design patent is...more
The Commission recently reversed the ALJ’s determination that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement was satisfied and thereby found that there had been no section 337 violation in Certain Replacement...more
Addressing a determination by its chief administrative law judge (CALJ) finding a violation of § 337, the US International Trade Commission reversed and held that the complainant had not satisfied the economic prong of the...more
Is it possible that adding more specificity and detail to a design claim can render the claim indefinite and non-enabled under 35 U.S.C. 112? According to the USPTO, the answer is: yes....more
Join Directors Daniel E. Yonan, Uma N. Everett, and Paul A. Ainsworth for the "ITC Section 337 Year in Review" webinar on Wednesday, February 28, 2024, at 2:00 p.m. EST. This webinar wraps up our 2023 series, Navigating the...more