News & Analysis as of

United States Patent and Trademark Office Intellectual Property Litigation Prior Art

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.... more +
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is an agency of the United States Department of Commerce that serves a fundamental role in the U.S. intellectual property system by issuing patents and registering trademarks.    less -
Vinson & Elkins LLP

Federal Circuit Defines Scope of IPR Estoppel

Vinson & Elkins LLP on

In Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC, the Federal Circuit defined for the first time the scope of inter partes review (“IPR”) estoppel in district court and International Trade Commission (ITC) proceedings: IPR estoppel applies...more

BakerHostetler

US Patents Set to Issue 33 Percent Faster from the Notification Date

BakerHostetler on

Starting May 13, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will accelerate the time between issue notification and the issue date of a patent. That is, the time frame will be cut from about three weeks to two weeks –...more

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

Estoppel Certification in Reexamination

Estoppel certification in reexamination prevents relitigation of resolved issues....more

Goodwin

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s In Re Xencor Decision: Jepson Claims Require Written Description for Their...

Goodwin on

On March 13, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Xencor, Inc. (the Xencor decision). The Xencor decision affirms the decision of the Appeals Review Panel...more

Knobbe Martens

The Board Must Provide Reasoned Explanation When Discarding Material, Unrebutted Evidence

Knobbe Martens on

CQV CO., LTD. v. MERCK PATENT GMBH - Before Cunningham, Chen, and Mayer. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board erred by failing to explain why it discarded material and unrebutted evidence that a reference...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court: Incorporation by Reference for Purposes of Anticipation Requires More than a Parenthetical

In a series of rulings on a motion in limine, the District of Delaware recently distinguished between what qualifies as being incorporated by reference and what does not for the purposes of an anticipation defense. In short,...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Immunogen, Inc. v. Stewart (Fed. Cir. 2025)

After creating something of a frisson due to the apprehension that the Federal Circuit might be convinced to re-evaluate whether it was a necessary element for establishing obviousness for the skilled artisan to have had a...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

The Impact of Prosecution Length on Invalidity Outcomes in Patent Litigation

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

This Article analyzes over 89,000 patents litigated over a twenty-year period to determine how the number of office actions to allowance during prosecution impacts rates of invalidity during subsequent litigation. Many...more

Alston & Bird

Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter | February 2025

Alston & Bird on

Welcome to the Intellectual Property Litigation Newsletter, our review of decisions and trends in the intellectual property arena. In this edition, we learn that the Federal Circuit always says never, patent publications...more

Knobbe Martens

Every Word Counts: Specification Naming Conventions Can Limit Claim Scope

Knobbe Martens on

A patent’s specification established a naming convention that applied to terms in the patent’s claims. Microchip Technology filed an IPR, arguing all claims of HD Silicon Solutions’ patent were invalid. The challenged patent...more

McDermott Will & Emery

It’s Obvious: Erroneous Claim Construction Can Be Harmless

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness determination even though it found the Board had improperly construed a claim term, because the Court found the error harmless...more

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

Baker Botts L.L.P.

35 U.S.C. § 112 in IPR: I know you cannot use it to invalidate a claim, but how about breaking the priority chain?

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

It is well established that “a petitioner in an inter partes review … is not permitted to assert a ground of unpatentability under 35 U.S.C. § 112.” Dexcowin Golabl, Inc. v. Aribex, Inc., IPR2016-00436, Paper 12 (PTAB July 7,...more

Morgan Lewis

Federal Circuit Clarifies Secret Prior Art May Be Used in IPR Challenges

Morgan Lewis on

On January 14, 2025, the Federal Circuit in Lynk Labs Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. clarified that inter partes review challenges may be “based upon published patent applications, and such published patent applications...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

IP Alert: Federal Circuit Clarifies What Is Deemed Prior Art in an IPR

On January 14, in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the Federal Circuit held that a published patent application can be prior art in an inter partes review (IPR) based on the application’s filing date, not the...more

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

AI IP Year in Review - Patent Law and Generative AI 101

While Artificial Intelligence (AI) solutions, such as predictive AI, have been around for decades, generative AI systems are recent innovations with far reaching implications for patent law. Generative AI, such as ChatGPT,...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Voluminous Expert Testimony and Exhibits Insufficient on Their Own to Warrant Denial of IPR Institution

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board granted institution of inter partes review of a patent directed to delivery of targeted television advertisements. The board rejected patent owner’s argument that a lack of particularity as...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

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Navigating the PREVAIL Act: Key Impacts on Litigants as It Advances in the Senate

The PREVAIL Act is now subject to debate before the full Senate. The Act will require petitioners to certify standing, two new categories of which were recently added via a manager’s amendment....more

McGuireWoods LLP

Federal Circuit: Published Patent Applications Available as Prior Art in IPRs as of Filing Date

McGuireWoods LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled on Jan. 14, 2025, in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., that published U.S. patent applications may continue to be used as prior art in inter partes...more

Jones Day

Prior Art Asserted in Second Petition Should Have Been Asserted in the First

Jones Day on

The PTAB denied institution of a second inter partes review (“IPR”) petition filed by Aylo Freesites (“Petitioner”) after having previously instituted inter partes review of Petitioner’s first petition related to the same...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending January 3, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Honeywell International Inc., et al. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., Nos. 2023-1354, -1384, -1407 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Jan. 2, 2025). Opinion by Dyk, joined by Chen. Dissenting opinion by Stoll....more

Fenwick & West LLP

En Banc Federal Circuit Overrules Longstanding Test for Design Patent Obviousness

Fenwick & West LLP on

On Tuesday, the en banc Federal Circuit released its highly anticipated decision in LKQ v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, rejecting as “improperly rigid” the previous standard for evaluating whether a design patent is...more

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

Requester Side Benchmarks for Successful Reexamination Requests

Takeaways: -A requester can have a voice in ex parte reexamination prosecution. - Requesters should strategically structure their request documents to hedge against potential patent owner amendment and argument. The...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

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