News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation Standard of Review Prior Art

Fish & Richardson

Director Review Spotlight: Applicant Admitted Prior Art

Fish & Richardson on

Over the past two years, Director Vidal has issued two Director Review decisions related to the proper use of Applicant Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings. In both cases, Director...more

Haug Partners LLP

Teaching Away and No Reasonable Expectation of Success Arguments Insufficient to Avoid Obviousness Affirmance by the Federal...

Haug Partners LLP on

In Trustees of Columbia University v. Illumina, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB” or “Board”) decision to invalidate five patents owned by Columbia,...more

Knobbe Martens

Arctic Cat Inc. v. GEP Power Products, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Reyna, Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Where the preamble of a claim merely identifies an intended use and does not impose a structural...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Co. v. Synvina...

DuPont petitioned for inter partes review of Synvina’s patent, which was directed to a method of oxidizing a chemical using a specific temperature range, pressure range, catalyst, and solvent. The prior art disclosed the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Holding of No Interference in Fact in CRISPR Interference, Leaving Both Sides Free to License Their...

On September 10, 2018, the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determining that there was no interference in fact between the University of California’s (“UC”) U.S. Patent...more

Jones Day

Not So Secondary: Overcoming Obviousness With Objective Indicia

Jones Day on

On April 2, 2018, the PTAB issued a final written decision in Fox Factory finding that the petitioner failed to carry its burden in showing the instituted claims were unpatentable as obvious. Fox Factory, Inc. v. SRAM, LLC,...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Establishing Obviousness: A Fundamental Case of Evidence Over Arguments

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s inter partes review decision declaring various claims of patent owner Thales’ U.S. Patent No. 6,474,159 (“the ‘159 patent”) nonobvious. In doing so, the Federal...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Tygacil Formulation Patent

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Apotex, Inc. v. Wyeth LLC, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding that Apotex had failed to show that claims directed to a specific formulation of tigecycline...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Aqua Products, Inc. -- CAFC Grants Rehearing En Banc to Consider PTAB Motions to Amend

On Friday, August 13, 2016, the Federal Circuit granted a petition for rehearing en banc filed in the In re Aqua Products, Inc. case to consider two questions related to the PTAB's treatment of Motions to Amend in IPR...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Finds CBM Eligibility Reviewable on Appeal

The Federal Circuit yesterday issued a precedential opinion in Versata Development Group v. SAP America, Inc., Appeal No. 2014-1194 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 9, 2015), finding the claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In addition to...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide