News & Analysis as of

Patents Intellectual Property Protection Prior Art

Jones Day

PTAB Allows Three Concurrent IPR Petitions for Unusual Patent Claims

Jones Day on

Recently, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) was persuaded to consider the merits of three out of seven concurrent petitions for an inter partes review of a single patent due to the patent’s complicated claiming...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending April 18, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., et al., No. 2023-2437 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Apr. 18, 2025). Opinion by Dyk, joined by Prost and Goldberg (sitting by designation). Recentive sued Fox for infringing four patents that...more

Jones Day

Expert Testimony Supporting POPR Can Be An Effective Strategy

Jones Day on

It is relatively uncommon for parties to submit expert declarations in the preliminary-response phase of an IPR proceeding, but recently the Patent Owner in Imperative Care, Inc. v. Inari Medical, Inc. effectively used that...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

USPTO Moves to Expedite Patent Issuance

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

The USPTO recently announced that they would expedite patent issuance by reducing the time between Issue Notification and Issue Date. Effective May 13, 2025, patents will now issue approximately two weeks after receiving the...more

DLA Piper

Patenting Quantum Computing: Challenges, Trends, and Future Prospects

DLA Piper on

Predictions about the arrival of fault-tolerant quantum computing and commercially viable quantum computing vary widely. Some experts estimate that within the next three to five years, we may see early quantum advantage in...more

Jones Day

Provisionals’ Disclosures Must Fully Support an Issued Claim for Pre-AIA Priority

Jones Day on

The PTAB recently provided a pre-AIA priority analysis for reference patents in Roku, Inc. v. Anonymous Media Research Holdings, LLC, No. IPR2024-01057, Paper 10 (P.T.A.B. Feb. 10, 2025). This decision highlights the...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

The Uncertain Future of Section 101: Patent Eligibility in the Wake of Recent Supreme Court (In)Action

Patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 remains one of the most hotly contested and unpredictable areas of U.S. patent law. In the years following the Supreme Court’s landmark decisions in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Riggs

In re: Riggs, Appeal No. 2022-1945 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025) Our Case of the Week explores the power of an examiner to request a rehearing after the Board has entered a decision on an application. The case also relates to...more

Fish & Richardson

EPRx 101: Getting to Know Ex Parte Reexamination

Fish & Richardson on

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

Kilpatrick

PTAB: A Provisional Application Must Provide Written Description Support for Relied Upon

Kilpatrick on

In a decision issued today, the Federal Circuit addressed the issue of whether an Examiner can rely on the filing date of a provisional application under pre-AIA 102(e) to support a rejection based on a later-filed and...more

Goodwin

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s In Re Xencor Decision: Jepson Claims Require Written Description for Their...

Goodwin on

On March 13, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Xencor, Inc. (the Xencor decision). The Xencor decision affirms the decision of the Appeals Review Panel...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] 21st Annual Conference on Paragraph IV Disputes - April 29th - 30th, New York, NY

Attend ACI's 21st Annual Conference on Paragraph IV Disputes and join leaders from brand and generic pharmaceutical companies, renowned outside counsel, esteemed members of the judiciary, government, and academia to: -...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Palette of Evidence: PTAB Must Consider Entire Record to Determine Prior Art Status

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board patentability determination, finding that the Board failed to consider the entire record regarding the prior art status of a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Get a Grip: Not All Cords Have Handles

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement because the district court improperly narrowed a claim term during its construction. IQRIS Technologies...more

Knobbe Martens

Limits of Inherent Anticipation in Product-By-Process Claims

Knobbe Martens on

RESTEM, LLC v. JADI CELL, LLC - Before Moore, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Inherency in product-by-process claims requires the prior art process to inevitably produce the claimed...more

Knobbe Martens

The Board Must Provide Reasoned Explanation When Discarding Material, Unrebutted Evidence

Knobbe Martens on

CQV CO., LTD. v. MERCK PATENT GMBH - Before Cunningham, Chen, and Mayer. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board erred by failing to explain why it discarded material and unrebutted evidence that a reference...more

Knobbe Martens

Where Method Claim Steps Are Connected by “And,” a Covered Method Must Perform Each Step

Knobbe Martens on

SIERRA WIRELESS, ULC V. SISVEL S.P.A. Before Moore, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board erred by finding method-claim steps connected by “and” to be conditional and by never...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Touches on Appellate Standing and Prior Art Determinations in the Context of Post-Grant Review Proceedings

In CQV Co. Ltd. v. Merck Patent GmbH, the Federal Circuit addressed (1) the interaction of indemnification agreements with Article III standing for appeals of post-grant review decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board;...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending March 14, 2025

Alston & Bird on

CQV Co., Ltd. v. Merck Patent GmbH, No. 2023-1027 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Mar. 10, 2025). Opinion by Cunningham, joined by Chen and Mayer. CQV petitioned the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for post-grant review of a Merck patent...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Analysis Finding Product-by-Process Claim Narrowed During Prosecution Valid Over Prior Art

In a precedential opinion issued on March 4, 2025, in Restem, LLC v. Jadi Cell, LLC, No, 23-2054, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s claim construction and ruling that product-by-process...more

Saul Ewing LLP

What Intellectual Property Owners Need to Know Today About Obviousness-Type Double Patenting

Saul Ewing LLP on

What You Need to Know: • Instead of filing multiple applications claiming different aspects of an invention but not sharing a single priority chain, patentees should strive to file highly comprehensive applications that...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court: Incorporation by Reference for Purposes of Anticipation Requires More than a Parenthetical

In a series of rulings on a motion in limine, the District of Delaware recently distinguished between what qualifies as being incorporated by reference and what does not for the purposes of an anticipation defense. In short,...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Anticipation Analysis for Product-By-Process Claims

In Restem, LLC v. Jadi Cell, LLC, No. 2023-2054 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2025), the Federal Circuit upheld the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision holding that U.S. Patent No. 9,803,176 (“the ’176 patent”) was not inherently...more

Jones Day

Petitioner’s Proof of Printed Publication Falls Short

Jones Day on

On February 6, 2025, the PTAB denied IPR institution because the Petitioner failed to establish that its key prior art reference qualified as a printed publication under Section 102(b). The PTAB’s decision hinged on whether...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Patent Strategy: Securing Patent Protection for New Use of Old Drugs

Foley & Lardner LLP on

GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) were initially approved for diabetes treatment (e.g., Ozempic®) but have revolutionized weight management (e.g., Wegovy®) and are now being explored for treating a wide range of health...more

335 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 14

"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