Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
Cross-Border Patent Assignment--How Can Foreigners Obtain Patent Assignments from Chinese Patentees?
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Five Popular Misconceptions about Patents
Pepper Hamilton Higher Education "In Brief" Webinar Series: Intellectual Property Basics - What Every Higher Education Administrator Needs To Know
6 Key Takeaways | Protect Your Business's Foundation and Future with a Strong Internal Patent System
IP(DC) Podcast: Patent Battles – New Patent Initiatives on the Hill & Notable CAFC/SCOTUS Decisions
Impact of Changes at the PTAB on Patent Owners
Podcast: IP Life Sciences Landscape: Aiding Orange and Purple Book Patent Owners in Developing PTAB Survival Skills
Podcast: PTAB Changes After SAS: New Litigation Tactics & Further Changes to Come
Podcast: PTAB Update: New USPTO Director Brings Significant Changes to PTAB
IP|Trend: Starting Up Your Protection of Intellectual Property
The Intersection Between Intellectual Property Law and Employment Law
On April 18, in Recentive Analytics, Inc., v. Fox Corp., which presented a question of first impression, the Federal Circuit held that claims that do no more than apply established methods of machine learning to a new data...more
Patent holders must start Unified Patent Court (UPC) proceedings on the merits within a certain period if they do not want to risk the revocation of provisional measures. The UPC has now clarified that filing the statement of...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
Ex parte reexamination (EPRx) is a powerful tool that allows any party — including the patent owner — to request that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) reassess the validity of an issued patent based on...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
Because there are different burdens of proof in IPRs and district court, collateral estoppel does not preclude a patent owner from asserting claims that are immaterially different from claims canceled in an IPR....more
Abuse of Process and/or Sanctions – 37 C.F.R. § 42.12 - Spectrum Solutions LLC v. Longhorn Vaccines & Diagnostics, LLC, IPR2021-00847, IPR2021-00850, IPR2021-00854, IPR2021-00857 & IPR2021-00860 - Decision...more
On, January 27, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part a decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) on certain claims of Gesture Technology...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
CYTIVA BIOPROCESS R&D AB V. JSR CORP. - Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A claim limitation merely reciting an inherent property or result of an otherwise obvious...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found the patents at issue invalid based on the patent owner’s “quotation” letter to a third party, concluding it was a commercial offer for sale under pre-America Invents Act...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a patent owner’s motion to voluntarily dismiss the appeal following the Federal Circuit’s decision to vacate and remand the case to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board but...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court determination that a patent owner had not provided the “particularized testimony and linking argument” required to demonstrate equivalence under the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s decision to deny an antisuit injunction prohibiting a patent owner from enforcing injunctions that it obtained in Columbia and Brazil on standard...more
The Federal Circuit recently upheld the USPTO’s authority under the estoppel provision 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i) to prohibit a patent owner from obtaining patent claims that are not patentably distinct from claims previously...more
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2023-1101 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 25, 2024) The Federal Circuit’s only precedential opinion this week was a rare order that granted en banc review of a prior panel decision. Here, the...more
On review of a final written decision from the Patent Trial & Appeal Board in an inter partes review (IPR), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that all challenged claims were obvious but left open the...more
In In re Cellect, 81 F.4th 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2023), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a later-expiring patent can be invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) in view of an earlier-expiring,...more
Amazon’s Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) program provides an expedited and low-cost tool for patent owners to stop the sale of infringing products on Amazon’s platform. But low cost does not mean low risk. The U.S. Court of...more
SnapRays v. Lighting Defense Group, Appeal No. 2023-1184 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2024) Our Case of the Week deals with an issue the Court has not addressed recently: the question of declaratory judgment jurisdiction....more
The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is revolutionizing the way patents are enforced in Europe, and McDermott’s intellectual property team is here to help you navigate this dynamic landscape. Our Legal Lens on the Unified Patent...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s indefiniteness determination, finding that two claim limitations – one broad and one narrow – were not contradictory since it was possible to meet...more
A trio of cases this past year illustrate a trend of increasing importance of the Patent Office’s rulemaking and enforcement. Parus Holdings, Inc. v. Google LLC, 70 F.4th 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2023) The Federal Circuit’s...more
Cellect owned four patents with claims that were found unpatentable by the PTAB in ex parte reexaminations for obviousness-type double patenting. The patents were granted Patent Term Adjustment (“PTA”) for the Office’s delay...more
Dexcom, Inc. v. Abbott Diabetes Care, Inc., Appeal No. 2023-1795 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s denial of DexCom’s motion to...more