News & Analysis as of

Patents United States Patent and Trademark Office Chevron Deference

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

USPTO Drops Proposed Rules on Terminal Disclaimers

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Earlier this year, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) proposed a sweeping set of rules imposing new requirements on terminal disclaimers filed to overcome obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP) rejections, and...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

Ballard Spahr LLP

Life Sciences Industry Update: 2024 Mid-Year Report

Ballard Spahr LLP on

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN LIFE SCIENCES - Life sciences companies are forming AI-driven strategic collaborations with tech giants, creating synergy that promises to revolutionize the industry. Companies like NVIDIA,...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

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

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

Fenwick & West LLP

Potential Impact on USPTO Regulations of Supreme Court Unraveling the Chevron Deference

Fenwick & West LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision to no longer give deference to government agency interpretations could lead to challenges against U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rules....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Former Directors Request Rescission of Proposed Rule Change

As discussed previously on this blog (see "USPTO Proposed Rule Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice" and "The USPTO's Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule: A Litigator's Perspective") and elsewhere, the U.S. Patent and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Another Kind of Term Limit: Delay Resulting from After-Allowance Amendments Deducted from PTA

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the US Patent & Trademark Office’s (PTO) decision on a patent term adjustment (PTA), finding that it was appropriate to deduct days from a patent term when the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Sides with PTO on Applicant Delay in Patent Term Adjustment

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a case explaining what comprises an “applicant delay” in the context of a patent term adjustment (PTA), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sided with the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) ruling that the...more

Goodwin

Issue Twenty: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

Knobbe Martens

An Improper Reply to a Final Office Action May Result in the Accrual of Applicant Delay for PTA Calculations

Knobbe Martens on

INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC v. IANCU - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary:  If a proper reply to a final Office Action is not...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

After-Final Response Does Not Stop PTA Clock

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc. v. Iancu, the Federal Circuit agreed with the USPTO’s Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) calculation that charged a deduction for “applicant delay” for time after the applicant filed a first...more

BakerHostetler

Director of PTO Requests Chevron Deference for Precedential Opinion Panel

BakerHostetler on

The Federal Circuit recently asked the government to submit an amicus brief to address “what, if any, deference should be afforded to decisions of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board Precedential Opinion Panel (‘POP’), and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

“Equal to” Means “Not Exceed” when Determining Patent Term Adjustment

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) erred in calculating a patent term adjustment (PTA) for a patent covering an oral osmotic form of an antihypertensive drug,...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Patent Term Adjustment: The Real Meaning of Applicant Delay

On January 23, 2019, the Federal Circuit decided Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. vs. Iancu and shed light on Patent Term Adjustment (PTA). PTA was established by the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 and codified at 35...more

Knobbe Martens

Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Et Al. v. Iancu

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Dyk, Schall, and Reyna. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: The USPTO is only authorized to reduce Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) for applicant...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

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

WilmerHale

INSIGHT: SAS v. Iancu - Changes to Inter Partes Review and Beyond

WilmerHale on

On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court issued its decision in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018). SAS involved a challenge to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (Board) practice of instituting inter partes...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Patent System after Oil States and SAS – What’s the future?

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On April 24th, the Supreme Court decided two important cases related to the United States Patent & Trademark Office’s inter partes review (IPR) proceedings for reconsidering the prior grant of a patent – Oil States Energy...more

BakerHostetler

[Webinar] Supreme Court Issues Decisions in Oil States and SAS Cases: A Discussion of the Impact on Patent Law and Inter Partes...

BakerHostetler on

This timely and fast-moving webinar provides insight for business leaders and legal counsel on the recently issued Supreme Court decisions in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC and SAS Institute...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Rulings Signal Significant Changes to Post-Issuance Patent Reviews

In a pair of decisions issued on April 24, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the constitutionality of and the appropriate practice for inter partes review. The 7-2 majority opinion in Oil States Energy Services, LLC v....more

44 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