News & Analysis as of

United States Patent and Trademark Office › Patent Applications › Appeals

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 -
A&O Shearman

Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit Holds That Conception Does Not Require Certainty of Success

A&O Shearman on

On May 12, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated-in-part and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision in an interference proceeding concluding that the Broad Institute, Inc. (“Broad...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Discretionary Denials—Act II

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

On March 26, 2025, the Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office fundamentally changed how the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) initially considers petitions in post grant proceedings under the...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Federal Circuit Revives CRISPR-Cas9 Patent Priority Dispute

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati on

The CRISPR-Cas9 patent landscape remains complex and unsettled. The Federal Circuit’s latest decision in University of California v. Broad Institute1 revived the high-stakes dispute between UC2 and Broad3 over foundational...more

Bracewell LLP

Recentive v. Fox: Machine-Learning Claims Fail to Make the Grade

Bracewell LLP on

The patent eligibility of claims involving the use of machine learning (ML) was recently considered by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., Case No. 2023-2437 (Fed....more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Developments in Patent Subject Matter Eligibility for Software-Related Inventions, in View of Guvera v. Spotify

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Innovators seeking patent protection for software inventions should be aware that all software inventions face patent-eligibility issues. Nevertheless, patent practitioners who are experienced in the art of software patent...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

New Federal Circuit Decision - Expect Getting AI/Machine Learning Patents Past 101 to Get Tougher

Quarles & Brady LLP on

The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., invalidating the patent claims at issue as directed to ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In what it noted was a case of...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Method of Treatment Claim’s Limiting Preamble Must Satisfy the Written Description Requirement

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati on

On March 13, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in the case of In Re: Xencor, Inc. In this Appeal from the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (ARP), with regard to...more

MoFo Tech

Federal Circuit Clarifies Requirements for Prior Art Under Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)

MoFo Tech on

Knowing what qualifies as prior art is a core requirement of patent practitioners—whether in life sciences, in the technology sectors or in post-grant proceedings. It is important to keep abreast of changes to the rules,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

A Patent Without a Pulse: Provisional Rights Don’t Outlive the Patent

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from a patent applicant seeking provisional rights on a patent that would issue only after it had already expired, finding that the applicant lacked the...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Limits Reliance on Provisional Priority Date Under Section 102(e)(1)

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP on

On March 24, the Federal Circuit held in In re Riggs that for a published non-provisional patent application to be prior art under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e)(1) based on an earlier provisional filing date, all citations to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re Forest

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

In re Forest, Appeal No. 2023-1178 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 3, 2025) In an appeal from a Patent Office decision denying a patent that would have been expired upon issuance, the Federal Circuit dismissed. Applicant Forest had filed...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Jepson Claim Format Does Not Avoid Written Description Scrutiny

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Current written description jurisprudence can make it difficult to obtain broad antibody patents, leading practitioners to explore alternative claiming strategies in an effort to bypass the limited scope afforded under the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Detour Ahead: New Approach to Assessing Prior Art Rejections Under § 102(e)

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit established a more demanding test for determining whether a published patent application claiming priority to a provisional application is considered prior art under pre-America...more

Goodwin

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s In Re Riggs Decision: 35 USC 102(e) Prior Art Requires Written Description Support...

Goodwin on

On March 24, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Riggs (the Riggs decision) that vacated a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the US...more

Cooley LLP

End of the Road for Jepson Format Claims in the Life Sciences?

Cooley LLP on

In In re: Xencor, Inc., the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit confirmed that the limiting preamble of a Jepson claim must be supported by the specification with “sufficient written description.” In its decision, the...more

Lathrop GPM

Significant Federal Circuit Decision Redefines Prior Art Requirements

Lathrop GPM on

Last week a remarkably interesting Federal Circuit case was decided concerning whether an asserted reference was properly shown to qualify as prior art in the rejection of a pending patent application. The pending application...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Riggs

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

In re: Riggs, Appeal No. 2022-1945 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025) Our Case of the Week explores the power of an examiner to request a rehearing after the Board has entered a decision on an application. The case also relates to...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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1475, -1533 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 4, 2025) Our Case of the Week is a high-stakes appeal from an inter partes review concerning a patent titled “Camera Based...more

Foley Hoag LLP

PTAB Overturns a Subject Matter Eligibility Rejection of Claims Directed to a Quantum-Computing Method

Foley Hoag LLP on

On February 13, 2025, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) overturned a patent eligibility rejection of claims directed to a method of performing a computation using a quantum...more

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP

The Precedent: Federal Circuit Clarifies Timing Issues Associated with Pre-AIA Patent Applications in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung...

Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease LLP on

In this edition of The Precedent, we outline the recent federal circuit decision in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs. Co. This case addresses the date on which a pre-AIA published patent application obtains its status as...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

2024 PTAB Year in Review

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati on

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present our 2024 PTAB Year in Review. We begin with a review of 2024 petition filings and outcomes at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

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

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP on

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

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C.

Published Application Art at the PTAB: Lynk Labs v. Samsung Electronics, Co., Ltd.

Wolf, Greenfield & Sacks, P.C. on

In Lynk Labs, Inc., v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., the Federal Circuit reinforced that patent applications may serve as prior art in IPR proceedings as of their filing date—even where those applications were not published...more

Jones Day

PTAB Fee Increases in 2025

Jones Day on

Petitioners may soon need to check their account balances, as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) is raising patent fees across the board, effective January 19, 2025. 89 Fed. Reg. 91898....more

102 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5
Next »

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide