News & Analysis as of

United States Patent and Trademark Office › Patent Applications › Obviousness

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 -
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

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

Recent Updates at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board

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

Recent changes at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) have brought uncertainty to inter partes review and post-grant review practitioners before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). These procedural and...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending April 4, 2025

Alston & Bird on

In re: Forest, No. 2023-1178 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) Apr. 3, 2025). Opinion by Chen, joined by Taranto and Schall.  In 2016, an inventor filed a patent application that claimed priority to an application filed in 1995. The Patent...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

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

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

Baker Botts L.L.P.

The Impact of Prosecution Length on Infringement Outcomes in Patent Litigation

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

This article continues our analysis of over 89,000 patents to determine how the number of office actions to allowance during prosecution impacts litigation outcomes. Last month we discussed how prosecution length impacts...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

Leveraging USPTO Delays To Maximize Patent Term

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Before the USPTO was subject to a hiring freeze, it assumed it would onboard 400 new examiners between fiscal year 2025 and fiscal year 2026, and still predicted an increase in the backlog of unexamined patent applications....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

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

What? The Pokémon Company’s Patent Applications Are Evolving!

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

In September of last year, and in light of a corresponding Japanese patent infringement suit, I published an article detailing how The Pokémon Company had filed two patent applications at the United States Patent and...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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

USPTO Challenges Reasonable Expectation of Success Prong of Obviousness Law Precedent in Immunogen v. Vidal

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has a history of attempting to challenge judicial decisions that the Office, usually for its own policy reasons, takes issue with.[1]  Recently, the Office decided to challenge the...more

Hudnell Law Group

Published but not Public? Federal Circuit Confirms Published Patent Applications Count as Prior Art from Filing Date in IPRs.

Hudnell Law Group on

On January 14, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., No. 23-2346 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 14, 2025), addressing whether a...more

Jones Day

When Is a Published Patent Application Prior Art in an IPR?

Jones Day on

On appeal from an inter partes review (“IPR”), the Federal Circuit held that, under pre-America Invents Act (“pre-AIA”) law, a published patent application is prior art as of its filing date as opposed to its later date of...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

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

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

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

Reviewing 2024's Crucial Patent Law Developments

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

As 2024 draws to a close, several crucial developments — some aimed at modernizing long-standing legal practices, others addressing emerging challenges — have reached patent law. Originally published in Law360 - December...more

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Christmas Came Early – USPTO Withdraws Proposed Rule on Terminal Disclaimers

Dinsmore & Shohl LLP on

Patent owners with robust continuation filing strategies can breathe a sigh of relief as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has withdrawn a proposed rule, which would have weakened patents linked to one...more

Jones Day

Supreme Court Denies Cellect Petition on Interplay Between PTA and ODP

Jones Day on

The Supreme Court denies Cellect LLC's petition for certiorari to consider whether patent term adjustment ("PTA") should be included in patent term for obviousness-type double patenting ("ODP") purposes....more

WilmerHale

Feeding and Generating AI Creates Patent Application Challenges

WilmerHale on

The explosion of artificial intelligence has raised some challenging questions in patent law, particularly with prior art, or the body of knowledge available prior to the filing of patent application. Two of the most...more

68 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3
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