Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
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
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Noteworthy Points in the Rules for the Implementation of China's Patent Law 2023
5 Key Takeaways | Best Practices in Patent Drafting: Addressing 112 and Enablement after Amgen
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
Intellectual Property In Department of Defense Contracting
The Art of Teaching Complex Technology in Patent Litigation - IMS Insights Podcast Episode 67
On Monday, the Supreme Court denied TCL Communication’s certiorari petition, without comment, appealing the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the essentiality of a patent claim is a question for the jury rather than judges to...more
In a precedential decision last week, the Federal Circuit held that CBS will not have to pay a $1.3 million infringement award because a podcasting patent was invalidated in an inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial...more
Reasonably Continuous Diligence Is Not Negated If an Inventor Works On Improvements or Evaluates Alternatives to the Claimed Invention - In ATI Technologies ULC v. IANCU, Appeal Nos. 2016-2222, -2406, -2608, the Federal...more
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
On April 24, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 7-2 decision, held that inter partes review (IPR) proceedings conducted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) do not violate Article III or implicate the Seventh Amendment. ...more
The PTAB’s new guidance in light of a recent Supreme Court ruling changes the dynamics for patent owners and petitioners. Key Points: ..Partial institutions are no longer permitted. The PTAB will review all petitioned...more
Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions, Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2016-2121, -2208, -2235 (Fed. Cir. 2018)?- In an appeal from a jury trial, the Federal Circuit addressed numerous issues...more
On April 24th, the Supreme Court decided two important cases related to the United States Patent & Trademark Office’s inter partes review (IPR) proceedings for reconsidering the prior grant of a patent – Oil States Energy...more
This timely and fast-moving webinar provides insight for business leaders and legal counsel on the recently issued Supreme Court decisions in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC and SAS Institute...more
This week the Supreme Court of the United States (“Supreme Court”), in a 7-2 decision, held that inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings conducted by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) do not violate Article III or...more
On April 24, 2018, the US Supreme Court decided two important cases that directly impact inter partes reviews (IPRs) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and patent litigation as a whole. In Oil States Energy...more
Is inter partes review of a patent grant compatible with Article III and the Seventh Amendment? That was the question presented in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group, and the U.S. Supreme Court this week...more
Oil States preserved the PTAB, and SAS Institute makes it a more important venue for patentability challenges. Key Points: ..IPR and other post-grant proceedings before the PTAB will continue. ..However, the PTAB may...more
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Tuesday on two closely monitored cases impacting how patents could be challenged. In the more high-profile case, the court upheld the constitutionality of the inter partes review (IPR) process...more
Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions that will keep the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) busier than ever. In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC,1 the Court affirmed that inter...more
Today (April 24, 2018), the U.S. Supreme Court released two important decisions regarding the authority of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) to conduct Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) proceedings. IPRs, an...more
LATEST FROM THE SUPREME COURT - We issue today’s special edition of Fresh from the Bench to summarize two important precedential decisions issued this morning by the Supreme Court. Both cases concern inter partes reviews,...more
On Tuesday, April 24, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two highly anticipated decisions that significantly impact inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The Supreme Court's...more
The U.S. Supreme Court today issued dual decisions with substantial impact on the future of Inter Partes Review (IPR) and related proceedings for challenging the validity of patent claims before the PTAB (Patent Trial and...more
On November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could undermine a key provision in the America Invents Act. Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC (Oils States). The issue...more
No provision of the Patent Act has been more frequently litigated over the last several years than 35 U.S.C. § 101. After not having decided a § 101 case in nearly a decade, the Supreme Court issued four § 101 decisions in as...more
In AIA America, Inc. v. Avid Radiopharmaceuticals, the Federal Circuit considered whether the Seventh Amendment provides the right to a jury trial to determine entitlement to attorneys’ fees. During the case on the merits,...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
In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the constitutionality of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. The Federal Circuit ruled that because patents were a public right,...more
“In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved…” unless the controversy involves the validity of a patent as determined by the Patent and...more