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
Celanese International Corporation, Celanese (Malta) Company 2 Limited, and Celanese Sales U.S. Ltd. (collectively, “Celanese”) filed a petition before the United States International Trade Commission (the “ITC”), alleging...more
The Federal Circuit recently affirmed an ITC holding that the AIA’s § 102 on-sale bar applies to the sale of a product made according to a secret process when that sale occurs more than one year before the patent’s effective...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - SANHO CORP. v. KAIJET TECHNOLOGY INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, INC. [OPINION] (2023-1336, 7/31/24) (Dyk, Clevenger, Stoll) - Dyk, J. The Court affirmed the Board’s decision...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the International Trade Commission’s (ITC) determination that the asserted process patents were invalid under the America Invents Act (AIA) because products made using...more
In Celanese Int’l Corp. v. ITC, the Federal Circuit addressed whether the America Invents Act (“AIA”) changed the on-sale bar such that the sale of a product made using a secret process would no longer invalidate later-sought...more
On August 12, 2024, the Federal Circuit published its decision in Celanese International Corp. et al. v. International Trade Commission. The Federal Circuit concluded that, under the America Invents Act (AIA), patent claims...more
You have invented a process for manufacturing a high-potency artificial sweetener. You are now faced with a critical business decision: how do you protect your intellectual property? You could keep your process a closely...more
On March 4, the Federal Circuit, heard oral arguments for Celanese Int’l. v ITC, 22-1827 (Fed. Cir. 2024), a case that may reshape the dynamics between trade secrets and patent rights....more
The America Invents Act ("AIA") bars a person from obtaining a patent when the “claimed invention” had been “on sale” more than one year before the filing date of the patent. 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1). Acesulfame potassium...more
As I described in the first two parts of this series, there are a number of ways in which the “on sale” bar can cost the unwitting inventor dearly. Hence, lastly, I would like to highlight some of the exceptions that can be...more
In part 1 of this series, I introduced the “on sale bar” and described how a commercial sale or offer for sale can negate patentability, according to the doctrine the Supreme Court established in Pfaff v. Wells Elecs., Inc....more
I. Minerva Surgical v. Hologic: Background - The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion earlier this year in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. clarifying the “in public...more
Last week, in a non-precedential opinion for an appeal from a Patent and Trial Appeals Board (PTAB) decision (In re WinGen), the Federal Circuit addressed prior public use under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). The issue was...more
A recurring decision facing many businesses is how to best protect the technology it creates. One can always try to keep technology “secret,” but that is often not possible, particularly with methods or devices that will be...more
A recent Federal Circuit opinion casts fresh light on two aspects of patent strategy: the experimental use exception to the on-sale bar to patent validity; and the role of a non-infringement legal opinion in defeating an...more
A medical device patentee has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to save his design patent, related to an introducer sheath handle, from invalidity based on application of the “on-sale” bar, which prohibits patenting an invention...more
In Junker v. Medical Components, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a catheter insertion design patent was invalid because the claimed design was offered for sale more than a year before the design patent application was...more
As post grant review allows for on sale bar assertions, and thus experimental use defenses, we wanted to highlight a recent case addressing these issues. Sunoco sued Venture and U.S. Oil Co. for infringement of U.S. Patent...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
The Federal Circuit has reversed a district court’s determination that the experimental-use doctrine insulated a subset of asserted patent claims from the on-sale bar. SUNOCO PARTNERS MARKETING v. U.S. VENTURE, INC....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court decision regarding experimental use under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and the application of enhanced damages based on an allegedly flawed...more
With another busy week of arguments last week, the Federal Circuit took a break from issuing precedential decisions. But it still pushed out several non-precedential decisions along with some quick affirmances without...more
On April 29, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion for Sunoco Partners Marketing & Terminals L.P. v. U.S. Venture, Inc., U.S. Oil Co., Inc. (2022 WL 1275697).This case touched on a number of...more
Sunoco Partners Marketing & Terminals L.P. v. U.S. Venture, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1640, -1641 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 29, 2022) - Our case of the week has a little bit for everyone, including lost profits, reasonable royalties,...more
SUNOCO PARTNERS MARKETING v. U.S. VENTURE, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Summary: References to testing in an offer for sale...more