News & Analysis as of

Reversal Substantial Evidence Standard

McDermott Will & Emery

Press Pause: De Novo Review Not Always Required for Obviousness

A divided panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s finding that certain challenged claims were nonobvious after applying the substantial evidence test to resolve a...more

Hinshaw & Culbertson LLP

The LHD/ERISA Advisor: Courts Say Abuse of Discretion Standard is "Highly Deferential" to Plan Administrator's Denial of Benefits

In Rittinger v. Healthy Alliance Life Ins. Co., 914 F.3d 952 (5th Cir. Jan. 31, 2019), and Roebuck v. USAble Life, 380 F. Supp. 3d 852 (E.D. Ark. Mar. 30, 2019), the courts found no abuse of discretion where the ERISA plan...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - November 2019: The Board's Reliance on Expert's Conclusory Statements May Not Meet Substantial...

In a recent precedential decision, TQ Delta, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a pair of USPTO inter partes review proceedings that invalidated all claims of two related U.S. patents because “the...more

Dechert LLP

Is Stricter Federal Circuit Review of IPR Factfinding on the Horizon?

Dechert LLP on

A panel of the Federal Circuit recently sounded off with something less than the usual deferential tone regarding review under the substantial evidence standard of factual findings on patentability made by the Patent Trial...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more

Knobbe Martens

Protecting Your Claimed Ranges

Knobbe Martens on

Assertions of obviousness based on prior art references in combination with “routine optimization” by one skilled in the art are common in the chemical and biological fields. The Federal Circuit recently addressed this issue...more

Knobbe Martens

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Prost, Newman, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: An unsupported expert opinion does not constitute substantial evidence to contradict a prior art...more

McAfee & Taft

ERISA Plans: Part-time employee entitled to disability benefits

McAfee & Taft on

In Van Steen v. Life Insurance Company N.A., the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the grant of long-term disability benefits to an employee working part-time....more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB: Summaries of Key 2017 Decisions

In 2016, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed more appeals from the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) than any other venue—a first in its over 30-year history. The post grant proceedings created by the...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

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Federal Circuit Rejects Board’s Understanding of Prior Art

The Federal Circuit has now reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision in Synopsys, Inc. v. ATopTech, Inc. finding claims 1 and 32 of U.S. Patent No. 6,567,967 (the “‘967 patent”) as being “not supported by...more

Burr & Forman

SC court awards Lowe's employee workers' comp disability benefits

Burr & Forman on

Employee disabilities are becoming a common issue that employers must address. Short- and long-term disability plans employers often make available to employees, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the varying...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | November 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Fraud-Detection Patent Claimed Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter - In FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1985, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that FairWarning’s patent...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

New York’s Highest Court: No “Stretch” in Yogi’s Independent Contractor Classification

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The New York Court of Appeals recently rejected the narrow view of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board and found that substantial evidence did not support a finding that certain yoga instructors were...more

14 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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