What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Hilary Preston, Vice Chair at Vinson & Elkins, Discusses Energy Innovation: Protecting Your Intellectual Property Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
(Podcast) The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
(Podcast) The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
A Conversation with Phil Hamzik
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
4 Tips for Protecting Your AI Products
Innovating with AI: Ensuring You Own Your Inventions
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Using Innovative Technology to Advance Trial Strategies | Episode 70
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
In Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 2024-1061 (Fed. Cir. August 13, 2024), the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court of Delaware’s invalidity determination of certain claims of U.S. Patent No....more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has withdrawn its controversial proposal to amend the rules on terminal disclaimers and double patenting. This decision marks a significant triumph for advocates of...more
Patent owners with robust continuation filing strategies can breathe a sigh of relief as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has withdrawn a proposed rule, which would have weakened patents linked to one...more
The Supreme Court denies Cellect LLC's petition for certiorari to consider whether patent term adjustment ("PTA") should be included in patent term for obviousness-type double patenting ("ODP") purposes....more
On August 13, 2024, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Allergan v. MSN that “a first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim” cannot be invalidated for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) “by a...more
The recent In re Cellect decision by the Federal Circuit1 is significant for patent owners who have obtained patent-term adjusted patents in the same patent family. The court held that term-adjusted patents can be potentially...more
Please join our Intellectual Property and Health Sciences practice groups for our podcast series focused on strategies, trends, and other happenings in post-grant proceedings. In this episode, Troutman Pepper Partners Andy...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) periodically evaluates the delicate balance of the U.S. patent system to protect innovation without excessively stifling competition. U.S. patents give patent owners the...more
On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that, if enacted, would tie the enforceability of every claim of a patent subject to a terminal disclaimer to the...more
Join Wolf Greenfield for a mid-year review of litigation and PTAB trends at 12:00pm ET or 9:00pm ET. This webinar will cover: 2024/2025 patent litigation trends: ITC domestic industry, double patenting, forum shopping,...more
On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) published a notice of proposed rulemaking in the Federal Register that could dramatically impact prosecution practices, especially for those...more
On May 9, the USPTO released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for significant changes to terminal disclaimers. The USPTO suggests adding a new requirement that applicants can overcome an obviousness-type double patenting...more
The USPTO on May 10, 2024, issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) raising the requirements for accepting a Terminal Disclaimer (TD) to obviate obviousness-type double patenting (ODP). Specifically, the newly proposed...more
Filing a continuation application from a parent patent is an implicit admission that obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) applies to the resulting continuation patent. A Terminal Disclaimer in the continuation patent over...more
Hosted by American Conference Institute, the 22nd Advanced Summit on Life Sciences Patents returns for another exciting year with curated programming that will provide practical insights on how to maximize your patent term...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness-type double patenting rejection, finding that an unexpected mechanism of action does not render the known use of a known...more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) organizes its examining corps into technical centers (TCs). Each TC is dedicated to one or more general technical fields. In some cases, one TC may include two or more unrelated...more
We write to advise you on an issue currently before the Federal Circuit in a case of first impression, namely whether a later-filed, earlier-expiring patent can be used as a reference for obvious-type double patenting (OTDP)...more
The EPO confirmed that a European patent application can be refused on the basis of double patenting under Articles 97(2) and 125 EPC, if a patent with the same effective date has already been granted for the same subject...more
Obviousness-type double patenting (“OTDP”) arises when two or more patents or applications include claims that, while not being identical, are not patentably distinct from each other. In the U.S., OTDP rejections can be...more
Double patenting has become a common challenge to patent validity in Canada since the decision rendered by the Supreme Court of Canada in Whirlpool Corp. v Camco Inc in 2000. The Canadian double patenting doctrine is similar...more
Though there are many similarities between U.S. and Canadian patent law, the following significant differences can affect the key decision of whether to file in Canada. 1. Grace period time limit - Sections 28.2 and...more
The approach of the European Patent Office (EPO) to prohibition of double patenting is well established and may, at a first glance, also seem well founded. Originally published in D Young & Co. on June 1, 2019....more
The BoA has been divergent regarding whether in an internal priority situation, the applicant would have a legitimate interest in a second patent protecting the same subject matter. ...more