News & Analysis as of

Patents Prior Art Section 101

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, June 2024: What’s Next for the Design Patent Obviousness Test; Federal Circuit Ruling on Printed Matter

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: Design Patent Obviousness Test Thrown Out - The U.S. Court of Appeals...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, April 2024: PTAB’s Analogous Art Finding Upheld by Federal Circuit, Blockchain Gemstone Identifying Process Patent...

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: Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Analogous Art Finding - As IP Watchdog...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

2023 Federal Circuit Case Summaries - Intellectual Property: Year End Report

We are pleased to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural “Year in Review” report that collects and reports on most key patent law-related Federal Circuit decisions for 2023. This is a follow up to the quarterly report we...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Senior Circuit Judge Issues Split Decision on Patent Eligibility of Claims Directed to Restricting Access to Computer Files

Senior Circuit Judge Bryson of the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation in the District of Delaware, recently granted-in-part and denied-in-part a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment based on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Trinity Info Media, LLC, fka Trinity Intel Media, LLC, v. Covalent, Inc., No. 2022-1308 (Fed. Cir. July 14, 2023) (“Opinion”)

This case addresses whether patents relating to methods and systems for connecting users based on their answers to polling questions claim patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Stanford Asks Supreme Court to Revisit Subject Matter Eligibility on Diagnostic Claims

"Hope springs eternal [in the human breast]" (Alexander Pope) and "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results" (the latter attributed variably to Albert Einstein and Werner Erhart) are two...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2023 #3

Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2263, -2264, -2265, -2266 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2023) In an appeal from a stipulated judgment of noninfringement and invalidity following an adverse claim construction...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Dismissed Infringement Claims Regarding Online Video Streaming Because the Patents Recited Patent-Ineligible...

Judge Cronan in the Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.) recently granted a motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint because the patents-in-suit are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] 18th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes - April 19th - 20th, New York, NY

Hosted by ACI, 18th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Conference returns to New York City for another exciting year with curated programming that not only addresses the hot topics, but also puts them within the context of pre-suit...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Dismisses Infringement Claims Because the Patent Recited a Patent-Ineligible Method for Real-Time Billable Time...

Judge Engelmayer in the Southern District of New York recently granted a motion to dismiss the complaint because the patent-in-suit is directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The patent is directed...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Something New: PTAB Tackles Section 101 Patent Eligibility

Holland & Knight LLP on

It's not often that we write about pharmaceutical patents on this blog, and even less often that we blog here about PTAB decisions. The former is a function of the Federal Circuit's decision in Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. v....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Silly § 102 Tricks

With further apologies to David Letterman - Almost two years ago we published Stupid § 101 Tricks, an article discussing some of the annoying, improper, and yet disappointingly common patterns seen in rejection and...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2022 #5

Best Medical International, Inc. v. Elekta Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2099, -2100 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 26, 2022) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed issues of jurisdiction where a challenged claim was...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Assignor estoppel applies to claims that are not "materially broader" than the originally assigned...

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - In Re MCDONALD [OPINION] (2021-1697, 8/10/2022) (Newman, Stoll, and Cunningham) - Cunningham, J. The Court affirmed a PTAB decision rejecting reissue claims under 35 U.S.C. §...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Repifi Vendor Logistics, Inc. v. Inellicentrics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

There is a theme running through many patent-eligibility disputes that is analogous to baiting-and-switching.  One party has claims that recite an invention.  The other party characterizes those claims at a high level or...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Granted Summary Judgment of Invalidity Because the Patent Recited a Patent-Ineligible Abstract Idea Executed in a...

Judge Orrick in the Northern District of California recently granted a motion for summary judgment of invalidity for patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found that the claims recited the abstract...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

USPTO Announces Deferred Subject Matter Eligibility Response Pilot Program

On January 6, 2022, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office announced a new program with the goal of increasing examiner efficiency.  The Deferred Subject Matter Eligibility Response (DSMER) Pilot Program will launch on February...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

In IPR, No Collateral Estoppel Based on § 101 Ruling in District Court

A panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted inter partes review of a patent, rejecting the patent owner’s assertion that the petitioner’s obviousness arguments were collaterally estopped by a district court’s...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

PATENT 101: Key Considerations and Activities for Establishing a Patent Program (Part 2 of 3)

Tasked with starting an innovation protection and patent development program at your company but do not know where to begin? This three part series describes the key components to a patent development program for any company,...more

Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC

IP 101: Patentable Subject Matter

Under the patent statute, any person who “invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent,” subject to the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Last Week in the Federal Circuit (October 4-8): An “Inventive” Authentication Scheme Takes The Cake Under Alice

Even though last week was argument week, that didn’t slow down the issuance of decisions at the Federal Circuit. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and our case of the week—our highly subjective selection based on...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CosmoKey Solutions GmbH v. Duo Security LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021)

CosmoKey asserted U.S. Patent No. 9,246,903 against Duo in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement.  The District Court found the patent's claims to be ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

MyMail, Ltd. v. ooVoo, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Two years ago, MyMail and ooVoo went to the mat in the Federal Circuit over claims that the District Court for the Northern District of California found ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Patent holder MyMail was able to...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

On the Nature of Prior Art in the 35 U.S.C. § 101 Inquiry

Diamond v. Diehr, decided by the Supreme Court in 1981, seemed to establish a bedrock principle of statutory construction for patent law.  The Court stated that "[t]he 'novelty' of any element or steps in a process, or even...more

115 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5

"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