News & Analysis as of

Patent Validity Appeals Prior Art

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | April 2025

Knobbe Martens on

In Ams-Osram USA Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America, Inc., Appeal No. 22-2185, the Federal Circuit held that under Texas law, a trade secret becomes publicly accessible on the earliest date it could be reverse engineered...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Federal Circuit Affirms Stem Cell Product-by-Process Claims: Lessons in Claim Construction and Inherency from Restem LLV v. Jadi...

The Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion on March 4, 2025, that serves as valuable guidance for product-by-process claims, particularly in the context of inherency in claim construction. In Restem, LLC v. Jadi Cell,...more

MoFo Tech

Federal Circuit Clarifies Requirements for Prior Art Under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)

MoFo Tech on

Knowing what qualifies as prior art is a core requirement of patent practitioners—whether in life sciences, in the technology sectors or in post-grant proceedings. It is important to keep abreast of changes to the rules,...more

BakerHostetler

[Podcast] The Changing Landscape: Admissibility of Experts in Patent Cases

BakerHostetler on

Experts play a crucial role in patent cases. Experts opine on claim construction, infringement, invalidity and the proper amount of damages. And the exclusion of an expert witness can significantly impact the outcome of a...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

The UPC and EPO Divide: Understanding Conflicting Revocation Proceeding Outcomes

With nearly 800 cases adjudicated or pending thus far at the Unified Patent Court (UPC), a possible procedural gap has appeared in the European patent system: no clear legal mechanism currently exists to resolve conflicting...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Validity Analysis for Product-by-Process Claim Focuses on Product

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board patentability finding, explaining that an anticipation analysis for a product-by-process claim focuses on the product and not the process....more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB’s holding of Non-Obviousness of Standard Adopted 3G Technology

The recent decision by the Federal Circuit in Honeywell International Inc. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., issued on January 2, 2025, overturned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“the Board”) factual and legal holdings in the final...more

Haug Partners LLP

A New Era for Design Patent Claims: Federal Circuit Overrules Rosen-Durling Test in LKQ Corp. v. GM Glob. Tech Operations LLC

Haug Partners LLP on

In LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Tech Operations LLC, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled the Rosen-Durling test for assessing obviousness of design patents.The now-outdated...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Wave Goodbye: Arguments Incorporated by Reference Are Waived

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s patentability determination, finding that the patent challenger waived an argument it attempted to incorporate by reference to another...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions: Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., 6 F.4th 1256 (Fed....

Intel Corp. petitioned for six inter partes reviews (IPRs) challenging the validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,608,675, a patent directed to power management in wireless devices. In each proceeding, Intel and patent-owner Qualcomm...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Federal Circuit Gives a Makeover to $66 Million Judgment Against Beauty Giant

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Earlier this month, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a $66 million dollar judgment against beauty industry giant L’Oréal for patent infringement, trade secret misappropriation, and a related breach...more

Smart & Biggar

Federal Court reinstates decision that REMICADE new use patent is valid and infringed

Smart & Biggar on

Update: The litigation between Janssen and Hospira relating to the biosimilar INFLECTRA, including the appeal of the reconsideration decision, was discontinued in July 2021. As reported previously... the Federal Court had...more

Sunstein LLP

FanDuel Learns the Hard Way: An IPR Challenge to Any Patent Claim May be Lost if Not Comprehensive and Rigorous Enough

Sunstein LLP on

As we demonstrated in our own successful appeal, Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016), a petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) may fail when an expert declaration lacks detailed explanation. An expert’s...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

In what may be simple happenstance, the Federal Circuit issued opinions on the same day reversing a District Court grant of summary judgment in opinions written by Judge Lourie, here in BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co....more

Knobbe Martens

Non-Prior Art Evidence May Be Used to Prove Inherency

Knobbe Martens on

HOSPIRA, INC. V. FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Moore.  Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Summary:  Evidence of the properties of claimed embodiments may be...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2019

Knobbe Martens on

One-year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties that Become Privies of the Litigant Prior to Institution. In Power Integrations, Inc v. Semiconductor Components, Appeal No. 2018-1607, the Federal...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2019

Knobbe Martens on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Obviousness Take Two

McDermott Will & Emery on

Finding that the district court improperly restricted a defendant’s ability to present the jury with relevant evidence of invalidity after a prior remand, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district...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

Smart & Biggar

Year-end Round-up: Notable Canadian Patent Cases of 2018

Smart & Biggar on

Earlier this month we published an exhaustive review of the life sciences and regulatory cases in the Canadian courts, and decisions on the merits for the year are summarized in our in our Rx IP Update 2018 Highlights in...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2018

Knobbe Martens on

The Board’s Final Written Decision Must Address All Grounds for Unpatentability Raised in a Petition for Inter Partes Review - In Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2018-1180, 2018-1181, the Federal Circuit held that...more

Knobbe Martens

Impax Laboratories Inc. v. Lannett Holdings Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A passing reference in the prior art to a formulation containing the claimed active...more

Knobbe Martens

01 Communique Laboratory, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, Mayer, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. Summary: While there is not a “practicing the prior art” defense to literal...more

Knobbe Martens

Massachusetts Court Finds Shaw Decision Forecloses Any Estoppel Beyond the Grounds That Were Instituted in an IPR, Despite Policy...

Knobbe Martens on

The court in Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Wangs All. Corp., No. 14:cv-12298, 2018 WL 283893 (D. Mass. Jan. 2, 2018) denied summary judgement of no invalidity, finding that the Federal Circuit’s holding in Shaw forecloses a...more

35 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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