News & Analysis as of

Patents

K&L Gates LLP

USPTO Discontinuing the Accelerated Examination Program for Utility Applications

K&L Gates LLP on

On 10 June 2025, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a Final Rule announcing the discontinuation of the Accelerated Examination program for utility applications beginning 10 July 2025. The change affects the...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

New Settled Expectations Policy at the PTAB Augurs Major Practice Changes

In a startling development, Acting Director of the USPTO Coke Morgan Stewart has denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) on the basis of “settled expectations,” on the sole ground that the subject patent had been...more

K&L Gates LLP

First Denial Based on USPTO’s New Discretionary Denial Factors

K&L Gates LLP on

Earlier this year, Chief Judge Boalick issued guidance on the USPTO’s recission of “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” explaining how the Fintiv...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Cardiovalve Ltd. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

One of the assumptions, or promises, or hopes, attendant on the inauguration of post-grant review proceedings (particularly inter partes reviews) under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act was that, as in European Opposition...more

Volpe Koenig

“Settled Expectations” as the New Gatekeeper for PTAB Discretionary Denials: Why Late-Stage IPRs Are Getting Harder to File

Volpe Koenig on

When Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart denied institution in Dabico v. AXA Power IPR2025-00408  Paper 21, much of the commentary focused on the result....more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Blank Check: Vendor Can’t Claim Declaratory Judgment From Customer Lawsuits Alone

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment action, explaining that declaratory judgment jurisdiction does not “arise merely on the basis that a party learns...more

McDermott Will & Emery

In Determining Subject Matter Eligibility, the Name of the Game Is the Claim

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a decision underscoring the distinct standards governing enablement under §§ 102 and 112, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s finding that a prior art reference was...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Radio Silence Alone Doesn’t Prove Equitable Estoppel Defense

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s summary judgment grant based on an equitable estoppel defense, finding that the accused infringer failed to show that the patent owner’s silence or...more

McDermott Will & Emery

CRISPR Clarity: Enablement Is Analyzed Differently Under §§ 102 and 112

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a decision underscoring the distinct standards governing enablement under §§ 102 and 112, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s finding that a prior art reference was...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Navigating Declaratory Judgment: Mitek’s Bid to Head Off USAA’s Patent Claims

This case addresses declaratory judgments of non-infringement in relation to subject-matter jurisdiction and the district court’s refusal to exercise discretionary jurisdiction. Background - In June 2020, Mitek Systems,...more

Smart & Biggar

Canadian Intellectual Property Office “Next Generation Patents” update and status as of June 17, 2025

Smart & Biggar on

On July 17, 2024, the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) launched a new electronic system and portal, MyCIPO Patents, as part of its Next Generation Patents initiative. The launch has been fraught with difficulties,...more

Venable LLP

Intellectual Property Due Diligence "Red Flags"

Venable LLP on

Want to learn more about drafting, negotiating, and understanding intellectual property and technology contracts and have 10 minutes to spare? Grab your morning coffee or afternoon tea and dig into our Tech Contract Quick...more

Vinson & Elkins LLP

File Early or Risk Denial: iRhythm IPR Institution Denial Underscores the Importance of Filing IPR Petitions Sooner Rather Than...

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

On June 6, 2025, the Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a decision denying institution of five inter partes review (“IPR”) petitions filed by iRhythm, Inc....more

ArentFox Schiff

Federal Circuit Narrows Scope of IPR Estoppel, Resolving District Court Split

ArentFox Schiff on

The Federal Circuit recently clarified in Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel does not extend to physical systems described in prior art patents or printed publications....more

Alston & Bird

Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | June 2025

Alston & Bird on

Welcome to the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, our review of decisions and trends in the intellectual property arena. In this edition, we learn that unilateral assertion is not industry standard, the IPR...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Enbrel® (etanercept) / Erelzi® (etanercept-szzs) / Eticovo® (etanercept-ykro) - June 2025

Venable LLP on

Etanercept Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Enabling Anticipatory Prior Art Reference Need Only Enable a Single Embodiment of the Claim

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MODERNA, INC. [OPINION] (2023-2357, 06/04/2025) (Taranto, Chen, Hughes) - Taranto, J. The Court affirmed the district court’s claim...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Synthego Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

An argument could be made that one of the most significant Supreme Court decisions in U.S. patent law in the last thirty years was Dickinson v. Zurko.  In that case the Court held that the Federal Circuit was bound by the...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Neulasta® (pegfilgrastim) / Fulphila® (pegfilgrastim-jmdb) / Udenyca® (pegfilgrastim-cbqv) / Ziextenzo®...

Venable LLP on

Pegfilgrastim Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Actemra® (tocilizumab) / Tofidence™ (tocilizumab-bavi) / Tyenne® (tocilizumab-aazg) / Avtozma® (tocilizumab-anoh) -...

Venable LLP on

Tocilizumab Challenged Claim Types in IPRs: Claims are counted in each IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple IPRs are counted more than once. Within each IPR, claims are counted only once, whether they...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Discretionary Denials in Action: iRhythm Technologies Inc. v. Welch Allyn Inc.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) Acting Director’s recent decision to deny institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) in iRhythm Technologies Inc. v. Welch Allyn Inc. offers valuable lessons for both patent...more

Irwin IP LLP

Seeing Double?  Similar Claim Terms Could Be Trouble  

Irwin IP LLP on

When prosecuting a patent with similar language across various claims make sure your claim terms have different meanings, otherwise, during litigation you may lose the strategic opportunity to keep some claims valid if others...more

Fish & Richardson

Ingenico v. IOENGINE and the Diminishing Role of Sotera Stipulations

Fish & Richardson on

In Ingenico v. IOENGINE, No. 2023-1367 (Fed. Cir. May 7, 2025), the Federal Circuit resolved a long-standing split among District Courts in favor of petitioners regarding inter partes review (IPR) estoppel under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Herceptin® (trastuzumab) / Ogivri® (trastuzumab-dkst) / Herzuma® (trastuzumab-pkrb) / Ontruzant® (trastuzumab-dttb)...

Venable LLP on

Trastuzumab Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Biosimilar Litigations - June 2025

Venable LLP on

Biosimilar Litigations include litigations relating to biosimilar/follow-on products of CDER-listed reference products. Litigations between biosimilar applicants/manufacturers and reference product sponsors as well as...more

20,123 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 805

"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