News & Analysis as of

Section 103 Section 112

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

2023 Federal Circuit Case Summaries

We are excited to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural quarterly report on key Federal Circuit decisions. The Spring 2023 Quarterly Report provides summaries of most key patent law-related decisions from January 1, 2023 to March...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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Three Properties of Patent-Eligibility: An Empirical Study

Patent eligibility is a bit of a mess these days.  Ever since the Supreme Court handed down the Alice v. CLS Bank decision six years ago, the distinction between what might be subject matter that can be patented and what is...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

How to Overcome the Two Biggest Challenges of Patenting AI Technologies

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Two interwoven challenges come to mind when considering how to successfully patent AI technologies. The first of these challenges is drafting claims whose infringement is detectable despite the black box nature of AI...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Addresses Indefiniteness and Mean-Plus-Function Claiming in Inter Partes Review Proceedings at the PTAB

The Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) decision declining to analyze patent claims as anticipated or obvious in an inter partes review (IPR) where the Board found the...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

Holland & Knight LLP

A Federal Circuit Quarrel: Patent Eligibility, Enablement and a Fiery Dissent

Holland & Knight LLP on

There is an ongoing struggle over § 101: the Federal Circuit struggles over the appropriate scope; the lower courts struggle to apply the Federal Circuit's decisions; litigants struggle due to the aforementioned. This has...more

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

IP Hot Topic: The Draft Subject Matter Eligibility Bill: A Work In Progress

On May 22, 2019, U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE), Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, and Representative Doug Collins (R-GA-9), Ranking Member of the...more

Snell & Wilmer

Legislators Propose Patent Eligibility Overhaul

Snell & Wilmer on

In April, we posted an article titled “Section 101 in 2019” summarizing the existing patent eligibility test, discussing recent Federal Circuit decisions, and providing practical strategies for practitioners to navigate the...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights - May 2019: Court's Infringement Indefiniteness Does Not Dictate Validity Indefiniteness at PTAB

In IPR2018-00272, the Board denied a motion to terminate brought by a Patent Owner who argued that a district court’s finding of indefiniteness required termination of the PTAB proceedings for U.S. Patent. 9,393,208....more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

A Federal Circuit Prescription to Take Away the Pain for Generics - Intellectual Property News

The Federal Circuit recently reversed a lower court’s ruling of validity under the § 112 written description requirement effectively opening the door for a number of generic drug manufacturers to enter the market with a...more

Sunstein LLP

May 2019 IP Update: Bipartisan Legislation Develops to Remove Supreme Court Roadblocks to Biotechnology and Computer Science...

Sunstein LLP on

On April 17, 2019, Senators Tillis (R-NC) and Coons (D-DE), along with a bipartisan group of three members of the House of Representatives, announced the release of a framework on Section 101 patent reform. Senators Tillis...more

Jones Day

Amended Claims In IPRs Must Clear Higher Hurdle Than Original Claims

Jones Day on

An IPR of issued patent claims is statutorily limited to prior art challenges based on patents and printed publications under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute an IPR of existing patent claims...more

Jones Day

Indefiniteness Again Leads To Unsuccessful IPR Challenge

Jones Day on

The PTAB may institute IPR proceedings only on the basis of certain prior art that is potentially invalidating under § 102 (novelty) or § 103 (obviousness). The PTAB may not institute IPR on any other unpatentability grounds,...more

Jones Day

PTAB Grants Rare Motion To Amend Patent Claim After Federal Circuit Remand

Jones Day on

Last year, the Federal Circuit vacated the Board’s original decision denying the patent owner’s motion to amend two claims in IPR2014-00090, holding that the Board erred by “insist[ing] that the patent owner discuss whether...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Sections 101 and 112: Eligibility, Patentability, or Somewhere in Between?

Womble Bond Dickinson on

We wrote earlier about the Supreme Court’s renewed interest in patent eligibility and seemingly unintended confusion between the patent eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the remaining patentability requirements...more

16 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