News & Analysis as of

Patents Patent Infringement Chevron Deference

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] 17th Annual Practitioners' Think Tank on ITC Litigation & Enforcement - March 31st - April 1st, Washington, DC

Examine real-world strategies for tackling the most pressing challenges in ITC practice at ACI’s 17th Annual Practitioners' Think Tank on ITC Litigation & Enforcement. Be in the same room with leading in-house counsel,...more

Flaster Greenberg PC

Chevron’s Demise and Its Effect on Intellectual Property & Its Governing Agencies

Flaster Greenberg PC on

For many, the demise of Chevron – the doctrine by which agencies enjoy deference in interpreting ambiguous statutes – has long been coming. While Chevron’s demise, and the resulting resurgence of Skidmore, is likely to lead...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Section 101 Patent Eligibility Roundup: It's Been Too Long

Holland & Knight LLP on

It's been a while since I last posted, and I apologize for that. (If interested, here's an alert about what's kept me away: a CFAA trial we wrapped up in late July.) But I am back, so let's look at the latest on the Section...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, July 2024: Impact of the End of Chevron on USPTO; PTAB Filings Are Up; and More

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review (IPR) cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: What Does the End of Chevron Deference Mean for the USPTO? In June, the...more

Venable LLP

Loper Decision Impact on Patent Law

Venable LLP on

Venable has offered general thoughts on the potential fallout from the Supreme Court's reversal of the long-standing Chevron deference, as well as practice area-specific analysis. Here, the Intellectual Property Litigation...more

Sunstein LLP

Court’s Strict Interpretation of Timing Requirement May Force Patent Validity Challenges in Two Forums

Sunstein LLP on

The America Invents Act (“AIA”), signed into law in 2011, introduced inter partes review (“IPR”), which allows parties to challenge the validity of patent claims in proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC

Federal Circuit Holds that Issue Joinder is Unavailable in IPRs

Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

In Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, No. 2018-1400 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 18, 2020), the Federal Circuit held that the “clear and unambiguous text of” 35 U.S.C. § 315(c) does not authorize “same-party joinder” and...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Facebook, Inc. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2020)

It's often said that hard cases make bad law.  And that is what had happened here:  faced with an unreasonable number of potentially asserted claims in litigation, and a Plaintiff not required to identify which of those...more

Jones Day

Post-Filing, Pre-Institution Merger Time-Bars Inter Partes Review

Jones Day on

In Power Integrations v. Semiconductor Components, the Federal Circuit ruled that privy and real-party-in-interest (RPI) relationships arising after a petition is filed but before institution may bar institution under section...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

One-Year Time Bar for IPR Filing Triggered Even When Served Complaint Is Voluntarily Dismissed

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In August, the Federal Circuit addressed the 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) one-year time bar to IPR institution in Click-to-Call Technologies, LP v. Ingenio, Inc. In an en banc footnote, the court held that an IPR cannot be instituted...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Dismissal “Without Prejudice” Does Not Nullify Service of Complaint

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing 35 USC § 315(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sat en banc to determine whether dismissal “without prejudice” would extinguish the effect of a previously served infringement complaint, an event...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2018 #5

Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. RPX Corp., Appeal Nos. 2017-1698, et al. (Fed. Cir. July 9, 2018) (unsealed July 24, 2018) In a lengthy decision on an issue of first impression, the Federal Circuit addressed the...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Supreme Court Tells the Patent Office That IPR Proceedings Are “All-or-Nothing” Affairs

On April 24, 2018, the same day that the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of inter partes review (IPR) challenges to issued patents in one decision (Oil States Energy Services v. Green’s Energy Group), it also...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Fractured Federal Circuit Holds Patent Owner Does Not Bear Burden of Persuasion in IPR Motions to Amend - In Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, Appeal No. 2015-1177, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, held that a patent...more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Federal Circuit Slams PTAB Amendment Policy

Troutman Pepper Locke on

On October 4, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, overruled an earlier panel decision and found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) had been impermissibly placing the burden of...more

Jones Day

SAS Institute Argues Before Supreme Court Against PTAB’s Partial-Decision Practice

Jones Day on

In a closely followed case before the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of SAS Institute Inc., a cross-office, cross-practice Jones Day team has challenged the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) practice to elect to institute...more

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.

Federal Circuit Finds That Petitioners Have Burden Of Persuasion Of Unpatentability Of Claims Amended During An IPR Proceeding,...

In a much anticipated decision, the Federal Circuit has narrowly decided that a patent owner moving to amend claims during an inter partes review (IPR) does not have the burden of persuasion that the claims are patentable....more

Hogan Lovells

Federal Circuit Shifts Burden of Proof for Amendments in Post-Grant Proceedings

Hogan Lovells on

On October 4, 2017, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, issued a ruling in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, placing the burden of persuasion on the petitioner to prove the invalidity of amended claims in post-grant...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

Supreme Court Upholds the PTAB’s Status Quo in Cuozzo

On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, which unanimously upheld the “broadest reasonable construction” claim construction standard (BRI) used by the Patent Trial and...more

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

Supreme Court Maintains Status Quo on Broadest Reasonable Claim Interpretation Test and Non-Appealability of Institution Decisions

On June 20, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC v. Lee, No. 15-4461, an appeal of an institution and cancellation decision in the first-ever petition for inter partes review...more

BakerHostetler

Federal Circuit Denies Rehearing on Whether Section 337 Includes Digital Imports

BakerHostetler on

The Federal Circuit debate begun in Suprema, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, 796 F.3d 1338 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (en banc), continued with the court’s denial of rehearing en banc in ClearCorrect Operating, LLC v....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Q&A from Webinar on Top Patent Law Stories of 2015

Earlier today, we presented a live webinar on the "Top Patent Law Stories of 2015." The webinar covered seven of the twenty stories that made it onto Patent Docs ninth annual list of top patent stories. The seven stories...more

Farella Braun + Martel LLP

ITC Has No Jurisdiction to Block Infringing “Electronic Transmissions”

On November 10, a panel of the Federal Circuit reversed a landmark ITC decision blocking the importation of digital information that infringes a patent. This decision has potential ramifications for a wide-range of companies...more

McDermott Will & Emery

On Remand, Panel Affirms ITC Finding of Section 337 Violation - Suprema, Inc. v. International Trade Commission

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a non-precedential remand decision, the original panel in the case of Suprema v. International Trade Commission affirmed the International Trade Commission’s finding that appellant Suprema violated § 337 by inducing...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | September 2015

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Remands Record Damages Award For New Trial On Extraterritorial Sales - In Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group, Ltd., Appeal No. 2014-1492, the Federal Circuit reversed a damages award...more

33 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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