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
On August 22, 2024, Hulu, LLC (“Hulu”) filed two separate petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 11,463,768 (“the ’768 Patent”), assigned to Piranha Media Distribution, LLC (“Piranha”). The ’768 Patent...more
Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., et al., Nos. 2023-1208, -1209 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Apr. 23, 2025). Opinion by Reyna, joined by Lourie and Prost. Qualcomm owns a patent related to integrated circuit devices using multiple power...more
Trade Commission is a federal agency whose responsibilities include investigating and where appropriate barring the import of goods resulting from a variety of unfair trade practices. It is headed by a bipartisan six-membered...more
Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2023-1208, -1209 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 23, 2025) - For a second time in this case, the Federal Circuit considered the proper role of “Applicant Admitted Prior Art” in an inter partes...more
Bridion® (sugammadex) - Case Name: Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc., No. 2023-2254, 2025 WL 795317 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2025) (Circuit Judges Dyk, Mayer, and Reyna presiding; Opinion by Dyk, C.J.) (Appeal...more
The Federal Circuit has overturned the U.S. International Trade Commission’s longstanding interpretation of section 337(a)(3)(B). Complainant Lashify, Inc. appealed an adverse decision by the U.S. International Trade...more
This Federal Circuit Opinion analyzes statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1) and examines offensive and defensive arguments related to § 103 obviousness. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC is the owner of U.S....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from a patent applicant seeking provisional rights on a patent that would issue only after it had already expired, finding that the applicant lacked the...more
On March 24, the Federal Circuit held in In re Riggs that for a published non-provisional patent application to be prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)(1) based on an earlier provisional filing date, all citations to...more
In re Forest, Appeal No. 2023-1178 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2025) In an appeal from a Patent Office decision denying a patent that would have been expired upon issuance, the Federal Circuit dismissed. Applicant Forest had filed...more
The inter partes review provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act have been criticized for the propensity of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to find invalid all or at least some of the challenged claims,...more
The Federal Circuit held in Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc., 23-2254 that a reissued patent receives patent term extension (PTE) based on the issue date of the original patent, not the reissue patent,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit established a more demanding test for determining whether a published patent application claiming priority to a provisional application is considered prior art under pre-America...more
On March 24, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Riggs (the Riggs decision) that vacated a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the US...more
Merck Sharp & Dohm B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc. et al (Fed. Cir. March 13, 2025) - The Hatch-Waxman Act seeks to strike a balance in the pharmaceutical industry by incentivizing drugs makers to develop innovative...more
APPLE INC. v. GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC - Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial And Appeal Board. A patent owner forfeits its argument that an IPR petitioner lacks standing under 35 U.S.C....more
In a precedential decision issued on March 5, the Federal Circuit held that the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) must consider various domestic expenditures related to foreign-made products in determining whether the...more
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has taken an axe to years of precedent in § 1337 investigations at the International Trade Commission (ITC). The ITC has long denied “mere importers” the protection of §...more
The Federal Circuit heard oral argument in Auribundo's appeal of the district court's decision in favor of plaintiff Merck, in a case captioned In re Sugammadex (alternatively, Aurobindo v. Merck Sharp and Dohme). The issue...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual property landscape. In 2024, several developments affecting PTAB practice emerged, from new rulemaking at the USPTO to key...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision finding challenged claims invalid based on a published patent application that, in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding, was...more
As 2024 draws to a close, several crucial developments — some aimed at modernizing long-standing legal practices, others addressing emerging challenges — have reached patent law. Originally published in Law360 - December...more
The America Invents Act (“AIA”), signed into law in 2011, introduced inter partes review (“IPR”), which allows parties to challenge the validity of patent claims in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Blackbird Tech LLC v. Health in Motion LLC, Appeal No. 2018-2393 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 16, 2019) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a fee award against prevailing...more
In a case explaining what comprises an “applicant delay” in the context of a patent term adjustment (PTA), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sided with the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) ruling that the...more