News & Analysis as of

Section 102 Patents Patent Trial and Appeal Board

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

2024 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual property landscape. In 2024, several developments affecting PTAB practice emerged, from new rulemaking at the USPTO to key...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

Published Patent Applications Are Prior Art as of the Filing Date, Not the Publication Date - Lynk Labs raises a simple question of statutory interpretation with surprisingly important ramifications:  in inter partes review,...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Provides Guidance On 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(B)’s Public Disclosure Exception To Prior Art

A&O Shearman on

In Sanho Corp. v. Kaijet Tech. Int’l Ltd., issued July 31, 2024, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“the AIA”) public disclosure exception to prior art, 35 U.S.C....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Private Sale Means Public Fail

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision that a private sale of a product embodying the claimed invention did not qualify as a “public disclosure” under 35 U.S.C. §...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Distinguishing Drinkware—Provisional Priority Determined Differently in Pre- and Post-AIA Patents

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a precedential final written decision, the Patent Trial & Appeal Board concluded that a patent does not need to contain a claim supported by a provisional application’s disclosure to draw priority to that provisional for...more

Haug Partners LLP

Mylan Failed to “Immediately Envisage” the Compounds in Merck’s Patent Covering Januvia

Haug Partners LLP on

In Mylan Pharm. Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., the Federal Circuit considered whether prior disclosure of a genus of compounds and their pharmaceutically acceptable salts was sufficient to anticipate, under 35 U.S.C....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Co-Authorship ≠ Co-Inventorship but Can Be Supportive of Inventive Contribution

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision because it failed to resolve fundamental testimonial conflict relating to inventive contribution and complete...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022

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

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

2021 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends: US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: Seismic Shifts in §102 and...

In 2021, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued four opinions regarding US design patents— two precedential opinions and two unprecedential opinions. Both precedential opinions, In re SurgiSil and Campbell...more

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

2021 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends

This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - February 2021

Knobbe Martens on

Evidence Supports Prior Art’s Public Accessibility but Not the Board’s Adoption of an Unpresented Theory of Anticipation - In M & K Holdings, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.,Ltd., Appeal No. 20-1160, the Federal Circuit...more

McDermott Will & Emery

If You Seek or Browse and Can Find, It’s Publicly Available, but Anticipation Isn’t Obvious and Requires Notice

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that facilitating browsing of documents on a website was sufficient to support public accessibility of prior art references, but that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Substitute Claims Proposed in an IPR are Subject to Patent Eligibility Review Under Section 101

In Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, Netflix, Inc. (July 22, 2020), the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the PTAB”) may consider, in its review of substitute claims proposed in an inter partes review...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - July 2020: Federal Circuit Confirms PTAB's Ability to Consider Subject Matter Eligibility of...

On July 22, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued an opinion in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC & Netflix, Inc., No. 2019-1686 (Fed. Cir. 2020) authorizing the U.S. Patent Trial &...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

“Anything Goes” – Federal Circuit Says PTAB Can Use Any Means to Knock Out Substitute Claims (Uniloc v. Hulu: Part 2)

Yesterday we discussed the Federal Circuit’s decision in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC confirming the Board’s authority to review contingent substitute claims after the original claims have been held invalid by a federal...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Last week, in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, the Federal Circuit ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may consider patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for substitute claims.  The appeal raises issues of finality...more

Haug Partners LLP

Uniloc v. Hulu - Federal Circuit Clash over Scope of PTAB Review of Substitute Claims

Haug Partners LLP on

WHAT DO WE KNOW? 1. On July 22, 2020, a sharply split Federal Circuit panel held that “[t]he PTAB correctly concluded that it is not limited by § 311(b) in its review of proposed substitute claims in an IPR, and that it...more

Knobbe Martens

Substitute Claims in IPR Are Subject to Section 101 Challenges

Knobbe Martens on

UNILOC 2017 LLC v. HULU, LLC - Before O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. O’Malley dissenting. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board did not exceed its statutory authority in an inter partes...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2020

Knobbe Martens on

Secret Third-Party Processes May Not Trigger Pre-AIA § 102 Public Knowledge or Use Bars - In Basf Corporation v. SNF Holding Company, Appeal No. 19-1243, the Federal Circuit ruled that a third party’s sale of products...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Patent-Eligible Improvements to Computer Functionality Must Be Directed to an Improvement of the Computer or Network Platform

McDermott Will & Emery on

Applying the US Supreme Court’s Alice v. CLS framework, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding patent claims directed to data management and processing systems...more

Jones Day

Speech Recognition Patent Invalidated on Multiple Grounds in CBM Review

Jones Day on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently issued a Final Written Decision in favor of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (“Comcast”) and against Promptu Systems Corporation (“Promptu”) in a covered business method...more

Jones Day

Design Patents at PTAB – Substantially the Same vs Basically the Same

Jones Day on

The PTAB’s recent decision instituting post-grant review of a design patent in Man Wah Holdings Ltd. v. Raffel provides interesting perspectives on how design patent invalidity theories work. This decision highlights the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

PTAB Clarifies when Live Testimony at Oral Argument Is Permitted, and Motion to Amend Practice

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated as precedential four decisions addressing America Invents Act proceedings and issues of live testimony at oral argument and motions to amend under 35 USC § 316(d)....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2019

Grunenthal GMBH v. Alkem Labs., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2017-1153, -2048, -2049, -2050 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 28, 2019) - This week the Federal Circuit issued a rare decision concerning the utility doctrine in patent law. In general,...more

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

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions: Medtronic, Inc. v. Barry, 891 F.3D 1368...

Although the Federal Circuit has analyzed the qualifications of prior art printed publications since its inception, the precise standards for public accessibility have become dramatically more important under PTAB...more

38 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