News & Analysis as of

Patent Ownership

Patented Halloween, Thanksgiving and Christmas Inventions

by Womble Bond Dickinson on

Part of the enjoyment of Halloween and Christmas is seeing the clever decorations and novelties people come up with for these two celebrations. But did you know, some of these are patented inventions? With (belated) Season’s...more

PTAB Designates Two 35 U.S.C. §315(b) Cases Informative

by Jones Day on

On January 10, 2018, the PTAB designated two decisions weighing on 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) as informative: Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. McGinley, IPR2017-01216, Paper 13 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 18, 2017) (AIA § 315(b), insufficient funds at...more

Have you ever used a one-click ordering process online? Then you indirectly paid Amazon.

If you purchased anything from a website using a one-click purchase button, you indirectly paid Amazon for that ability, at least up until September 11, 2017 when Amazon’s patent to this technology expired. As a result,...more

Declarations as New Evidence to Overcome § 325(d)

by Jones Day on

We have published other blog postings relating to 35 U.S.C. §325(d), including a blog posting that addresses the PTAB’s October 24, 2017 notice designating three of its decisions as informative (here). Recently, the PTAB...more

New Year's Resolutions For The U.S. Patent System

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

It’s that time of year when we make resolutions to improve our health, our relationships, our careers, or other areas of our lives. I’m not starting a new diet today (although if I were, the invention described in this patent...more

The Board Gives Section 325(d) Sharp Teeth—Part III —Things Are Looking Up for Patent Owners

This is the third of a three-part series discussing developments around Section 325(d). Part one appeared in our October 2017 newsletter and part two appeared in our November 2017 newsletter. As we have noted in each of...more

Word Games At The PTAB

by Jones Day on

In 2016, the PTAB changed the limits for the length of certain filings in post grant proceedings, including petitions and responses, from limits based on the number of pages to limits based on the number of words. The USPTO...more

Expanded PTAB Panel Finds Sovereign Immunity Waived By Patent Enforcement

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In a case of first impression, an expanded PTAB panel (including Chief APJ Ruschke) found that a parallel enforcement action by a patent owner waives its sovereign immunity defense against under the 11th Amendment an AIA...more

Perspectives on the PTAB Newsletter - December 2017

The Perspectives on the PTAB Newsletter is designed to be a valuable resource for all stakeholders in the global patent arena throughout the patent life cycle. To that end, articles will provide perspectives from both sides...more

Reference Reasonably Pertinent to One Problem Deemed Analogous Art

by Jones Day on

Section 103 does not, by its terms, define the “art to which [the] subject matter [sought to be patented] pertains,” but longstanding precedent couches this question of fact in terms of “whether the art is analogous or not.”...more

PTAB Denies Institution Because of Pending Reexamination Considering Same Prior Art

by Jones Day on

In a recent decision, the PTAB exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) to deny institution of an IPR petition that presented the same prior art before the Patent Office in a pending reexamination. Fox Factory, Inc....more

PTAB Issues Order Proposing Claim Amendments to Patent Owner

by Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB issued an order stating that it would grant Patent Owner’s motion to amend claims upon Patent Owner accepting further claim amendments suggested by the judges in Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Godo...more

Recap of PTAB’s “Chat with the Chief”

On December 19, 2017 the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) held a “Chat with the Chief” webinar in which Chief Judge David Ruschke presented very recent developments on a variety of topics related to practice before...more

Dear Santa … A Patent Law Wish List for 2018

Dear Santa: I’ve been a good patent lawyer this year, and I always comply with Rule 56. For all of the inventors we represent, I was hoping that this Christmas you would bring...more

The Marking Requirement is Alive and Well; Don’t Forget about Virtual Marking

The Federal Circuit recently faced a patent marking issue in Arctic Cat Inc. v. Bombardier Recreational Products Inc., [2017-1475] (December 8, 2017). In that case, the patent owner Arctic Cat had previously licensed the...more

Patent Owner Has Burden to Prove Marking Once Infringer Identifies Unmarked Products

In Arctic Cat Inc. v. Bombardier Recreational Products Inc., [2017-1475] (December 8, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of judgment as a matter of law as to obviousness, the jury’s royalty rate,...more

Obviousness v. Anticipation: That Which Doesn’t Disclose Still Could Teach

By Bryan K. Wheelock, Principal In CRFD Research, Inc., v. Matal, [2016-2198] (December 5, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed two Final Written Decisions invaliding claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,191,233 on user-directed...more

Inherent Obviousness: Available IPR Rationale With a High Standard

by Jones Day on

On November 28, 2017, the PTAB issued a final written decision upholding the patentability of U.S. Patent No. 6,667,061 (IPR2016-01096). The ’061 patent is owned by Alkermes Pharma Ireland, Ltd. and Alkermes Controlled...more

Patent Litigation Management - Strategic Decisions Can Help Manage the Cost of Litigation

With respect to patent litigation one thing is true – it can be very expensive. This expense is often viewed as a barrier to patent owners enforcing their patent rights and properly protecting their inventions and the...more

Federal Circuit Review - November 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

Fractured Federal Circuit Holds Patent Owner Does Not Bear Burden of Persuasion in IPR Motions to Amend - In Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, Appeal No. 2015-1177, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, held that a patent...more

US Supreme Court Hears Oral Argument on the Constitutionality of IPR Proceedings

by White & Case LLP on

On Monday, November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral argument in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC over whether inter partes review (IPR)—an adversarial process used by...more

PTAB Guidance on Motions to Amend in View of Aqua Products

On November 21st, the PTAB issued guidance on motions to amend based on the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, 872 F.3d 1290 (Fed. Cir. 2017). In view of the Aqua Products decision, the PTAB...more

PTAB Provides Guidance on Motions to Amend

Since the Federal Circuit’s complicated, 5-opinion decision regarding motion to amend practice in Inter Partes Review proceedings, we have been awaiting developments that will teach us what life in a post-Aqua Products world...more

The Board Gives Section 325(d) Sharp Teeth—Part II – The Petitioner's Criticality to Selecting and Using The Right Prior Art

This is the second of a three-part series discussing developments around Section 325(d). Part one appeared in our October 2017 newsletter and part three will appear in our December 2017 newsletter....more

Jumping into the Deep End: Amendment Practice Post-Aqua Products

by WilmerHale on

In the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc decision in Aqua Products, a deeply fractured court provides a glimpse into the perspectives that some of the judges have on post-grant practice at the...more

277 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 12
Cybersecurity

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.