A Unified Patent Court (UPC) is expected to officially open its doors in Europe in late 2022 or early 2023. The UPC is a patent‑specific court established by 24 participating European Union (EU) member states, with the goal...more
Judge Orrick in the Northern District of California recently granted a motion for summary judgment of invalidity for patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found that the claims recited the abstract...more
The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware recently rejected a plaintiff’s attempt to add to its complaint claims of induced infringement and enhanced damages based on pre-suit conduct. Specifically, the court held...more
In CardioNet, LLC, et al. v. InfoBionic, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s ruling that affirmed a defendant’s 12(b)(6) motion that the asserted claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, based on step one...more
5/14/2020
/ Appeals ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Extrinsic Evidence ,
Failure To State A Claim ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reversal ,
Section 101 ,
Written Descriptions
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) denied a patent owner’s request for discretionary denial of a second petition to the same patent as the first petition where patent owner itself asserted the claims of the...more
A federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia granted defendant Amazon.com, Inc.’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, ordering plaintiff Innovation Sciences, LLC to pay over $700,000 in fees that accrued...more
In a precedential decision in HVLPO2, LLC v. Oxygen Frog, LLC, the Federal Circuit held that non-expert testimony on obviousness is inadmissible, further finding that the district court abused its discretion by allowing a lay...more
3/2/2020
/ Abuse of Discretion ,
Expert Testimony ,
Eyewitness Testimony ,
FRCP 26 ,
Motion For New Trial ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Rule of Evidence 702
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
2/14/2020
/ Indefiniteness ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Means-Plus-Function ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Section 102 ,
Section 103 ,
Section 112
In a January 14, 2020, order, the Northern District of Illinois granted in part and denied in part, a plaintiff’s motion to compel the production of documents withheld as privileged. The court found that an email between the...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently designated three more decisions as informative, bringing the total number of informative decisions to 13 for 2019. Two decisions—one final and one on institution—address...more
1/6/2020
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Computer-Related Inventions ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Section 101 ,
USPTO
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board allowed live testimony in MPOWERED INC. v. LuminAID Lab, LLC, IPR2018-01524, on November 1, 2019, where a panel granted Patent Owner’s Motion for Live Testimony from a named inventor of the...more
Although a valid license can provide a complete defense to patent infringement, the tangled web created when the defense is predicated on a sublicensee’s rights following bankruptcy of the sublicensor may preclude resolution...more
The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s determination, holding a group of patents invalid for indefiniteness.
In December 2014, HZNP Medicines LLC (“Horizon”) brought suit against Actavis Laboratories UT,...more
11/11/2019
/ Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) ,
Appeals ,
Generic Drugs ,
Indefiniteness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
POSITA ,
Summary Judgment