4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | Corporate Perspectives on Intellectual Property
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
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - U.S. State Data Privacy Update
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
An August 2023 decision from the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals highlighted potential new fragilities in the patent portfolios of many industry giants, especially those in the pharmaceutical industry....more
Arthrex recently filed a(nother) certiorari petition with the Supreme Court, this time in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., which has also been the subject of petitions from the U.S. government and Smith & Nephew. (This...more
Under the America Invents Act, the USPTO is to stop accepting petitions for review of covered business method patents after September 16, 2020. Given the various other priorities Congress will be dealing with between now and...more
For the Patent and Trial Appeal Board (“PTAB”), the Administrative Patent Judges (“APJs”) are appointed by the Secretary of Commerce in consultation with the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. For an...more
In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...more
The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more
On June 10, 2019 the United States Supreme Court held in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. ____ (2019) that agencies of the federal government cannot challenge the validity of a patent via USPTO...more
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s finding that the government is a “person” eligible to petition for post-issuance AIA review proceedings. This 6-3 decision, Return Mail, Inc....more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before O’Malley, Bryson, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A writ of mandamus cannot be used as an alternative means of obtaining appellate review of...more
The PTAB dismissed the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe’s attempt to avoid IPR of patents covering Restasis®, which Allergan transferred to the Tribe in a highly publicized patent deal. See Allergan and the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe...more
The United States Supreme Court has been chipping away at patent rights for the past decade. The latest blow occurred on May 22, 2017, when the Court crippled the ability of patent holders to engage in forum shopping in TC...more
TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, Case No. 16-341 (May 22, 2017) In an 8-0 opinion written by Justice Thomas (Justice Gorsuch did not participate), the ?Supreme Court rules that a defendant “resides” for...more
In yet another unanimous intellectual property decision, the United States Supreme Court recently held in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC that “reside,” as used in the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. §...more