News & Analysis as of

Patents Intellectual Property Protection Supreme Court of the United States

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

Smart & Biggar

When patents expire but royalty payments don’t: contrasting U.S. and Canadian approaches to patent licensing

Smart & Biggar on

How does the expiration of the patents in one jurisdiction impact global royalty payments? This question was addressed by the United States Court of Appeal’s Ninth Circuit in C.R. Bard Inc v Atrium Medical Corporation, Case...more

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

Section 337 Now Viable for “Mere Importers” After Federal Circuit’s Lashify Decision

For years, the U.S. International Trade Commission maintained that the potent remedies available under Section 337 were unavailable to intellectual property owners considered to be nothing more than “mere importers.” That...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Patent Eligibility: The Call for Supreme Court Clarity and for an End to Summary Affirmances

The U.S. Supreme Court has once again been urged to revisit 35 U.S.C. § 101, the statute governing patent eligibility. Audio Evolution Diagnostics, Inc. (AED) filed a petition for writ of certiorari, challenging the Federal...more

Haug Partners LLP

The Sole Meaning of “Solely”: Supreme Court Denies Certiorari on Edward Life Sciences v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd. and Permits...

Haug Partners LLP on

This month the Supreme Court denied certiorari on Edwards Lifesciences Corp. v. Meril Life Sciences Pvt. Ltd., and in doing so, seemingly indicated its support for a broad interpretation of the Hatch-Waxman safe harbor...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

A POSA’s Motivation Is Not Required To Be the Same as the Inventor’s in Evaluating Obviousness

In its first precedential opinion of 2025, Honeywell v. 3G Licensing, No. 2023-1354, the Federal Circuit held that a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA) needs not to have the same motivation as the inventor in an...more

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

Reviewing 2024's Crucial Patent Law Developments

As 2024 draws to a close, several crucial developments — some aimed at modernizing long-standing legal practices, others addressing emerging challenges — have reached patent law. Originally published in Law360 - December...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Is the Federal Circuit Breathing Life Back Into False Patent Marking Claims?

The Federal Circuit determined that if a company misleads consumers about the nature of a product by making false patent marking claims, it can be held liable under the Lanham Act. False marking claims under the Lanham Act...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | August 2024

Knobbe Martens on

Specify the Steps of Information Manipulation or Lose under § 101 - In Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd. Appeal No. 22-2216, the Federal Circuit held that patent claims that merely recite result-orientated, functional...more

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

This Summer in Artificial Intelligence: Newly Released USPTO Guidance and Exemplary Worldwide Inventorship Updates

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently published new guidance on subject-matter eligibility as related to Artificial Intelligence (AI), opening a written comment window to respond with a deadline of...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

IP Alert: Are Terminal Disclaimers Destined for Termination?

July 17, 2024 Applicant-submitted terminal disclaimers tie similar co-owned patents to a common expiration date and typically serve to ensure that a later-filed continuation application lives no longer than its parent. The...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, February 2024: Supreme Court Passes on Fintiv Challenge, Parallel IPR/District Court Litigation, First Precedential...

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: SCOTUS Won’t Hear Challenge to PTAB’s Fintiv Rule- The U.S. Supreme...more

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

Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions (8th Edition)

2023 saw a return to business as usual for the Federal Circuit. Oral arguments are once again in-person and open to the public, and the Court has resumed its former practice of holding occasional sittings outside of...more

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

Federal Circuit IP Appeals: Summaries of Key 2023 Decisions (8th Edition): Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, 598 U.S. 594 (2023)

The Supreme Court’s lone patent case from last term does not break new ground on enablement law. The Court’s core holdings—that a patent specification must enable the full scope of the claimed invention and therefore that...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Senate Holds Hearing on Legislative Initiative to Address Patent Eligibility

Seeking to undo the current jurisprudence “mess” on the issue of patent eligibility, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Intellectual Property heard testimony on January 23, 2024, on the Patent Eligibility...more

Knobbe Martens

USPTO Says Wands Still Controls Enablement Analysis Post-Amgen

Knobbe Martens on

On January 9, 2024, the USPTO published guidelines for its patent examiners when evaluating compliance with the enablement requirement in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Amgen Inc. et al. v. Sanofi et...more

Venable LLP

New USPTO Guidelines: After the Supreme Court's Amgen Decision, In re Wands Factors Remain Applicable Enablement Framework

Venable LLP on

On January 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued "Guidelines for Assessing Enablement in Utility Applications and Patents in View of the U.S. Supreme Court Decision in Amgen Inc. et al. v....more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Enablement Post-Amgen and New USPTO Guidelines

Womble Bond Dickinson on

On January 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published Guidelines, applicable to any technology, for ascertaining compliance with the enablement requirement in view of the U.S. Supreme Court...more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTO Continues to Wave Wands in Assessing Enablement

McDermott Will & Emery on

In light of the 2023 Supreme Court of the United States decision in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) published guidelines for PTO employees to use, regardless of technology, to ascertain compliance...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2023)

Proper construction of claim limitations reciting the chemical property of pH (which denotes the concentration of hydrogen ions in a solution as an indication of acidity) has arisen several times in district court and Federal...more

Haug Partners LLP

Baxalta’s Antibody Patent Held Invalid under Amgen’s Enablement Standard by the Federal Circuit

Haug Partners LLP on

In Baxalta, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a summary judgment finding from the District of Delaware (Judge Timothy B. Dyk) that claims 1-4, 19 and 20 of Baxalta’s patent directed...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - September 2023 #3

Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1461 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 20, 2023) Our Case of the Week focuses on the enablement requirement. It’s the first case to come before the Federal Circuit following the Supreme...more

Hudnell Law Group

Supreme Court Uses Enablement To Curb Broad Patents

Hudnell Law Group on

On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court held claims of two patents owned by Amgen, Inc. to be invalid for failing to enable persons skilled in the art to practice the invention as required by 35 U.S.C. §112.  Amgen, Inc., et al....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2023 #4

United Therapeutics Corporation v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-2217, 2023-1021 (Fed. Cir. July 24, 2023) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent case this week, the Court considered questions...more

Sunstein LLP

Enablement Enigma: The Supreme Court Weighs In

Sunstein LLP on

In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court has affirmed the lower court’s ruling that Amgen’s broad genus claims to cholesterol-lowering antibodies are invalid for lack of enablement....more

147 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 6

"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