In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed a patent challenger’s appeal in an inter partes review (IPR) because the challenger could not meet the injury-in-fact requirement for Article III standing. Platinum...more
While a complainant does not need to have constitutional standing to bring a complaint in the International Trade Commission (ITC), at least one complainant must be the owner or exclusive licensee of the underlying asserted...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a district court’s grant of summary judgment, finding that the language used in an invention assignment clause was subject to more than one reasonable...more
Federal Circuit Orders District Court to Consider Extrinsic Evidence in Claim Construction - In Actelion Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 22-1889, the Federal Circuit held that where a...more
Intel filed three IPR petitions against Qualcomm’s ’949 patent, which is directed to “boot code” in a multi-processor system. Apple, who was not a party to any of the IPRs, uses Intel’s baseband processors in certain iPhone...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
Although it may seem counterintuitive, the PTAB has jurisdiction over expired patents, and patent owners may need to defend their expired patents in inter partes review. The PTAB recently reiterated this in Apple, Inc. v....more
Venue and Pleading Infringement in Hatch-Waxman Litigation Turn on Location and Identity of ANDA Filer - In Celgene Corp. v. Mylan Pharm. et al., Appeal No. 21-1154, the Federal Circuit held that in Hatch-Waxman...more
It has been argued that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) cannot engage in rulemaking through decisions made by its administrative patent judges (APJs), even if those decisions are made precedential, as APJs...more
On August 23, 2019, the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a precedential opinion relating to the one-year time bar under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). ...more
GoPro, Inc. v. 360Heros, Inc., IPR2018-01754 (Precedential Opinion Panel, August 23, 2019) - Section 315(b) of Title 35 prohibits institution of an IPR where the petition is filed more than one year after service of a...more
The US Court of Appeals vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) obviousness decision, finding that the disputed means-plus-function term was computer-implemented and therefore required the corresponding structure to...more
Back in March, I reported on the breadth of comments the USPTO received in response to its new Guidance on patent subject matter eligibility. Now, Congress has taken up the issue with a proposed draft of a new bipartisan,...more
Hogan Lovells’ U.S. + German Patent Update reports on recent patent news and cases from Germany and the United States. United States - - U.S. Congress Introduces Bill Addressing Patent Subject Matter Eligibility -...more
Did AVX Suffer A Constitutionally Recognizable Injury? AVX did not need Article III standing to file its IPR petition with the PTO because the PTAB is not an Article III tribunal. Further, the AIA provides that “a party...more
This week, the Supreme Court left open the question of Article III standing with regards to appealing a final written decision from the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) that is favorable to the patent owner. On...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - AVX Corporation v. Presidio Components, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1106 (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2019) - Following an inter partes review upholding the patentability of certain challenged claims, the...more
Article III of the Constitution imposes a “case or controversy” limitation on the jurisdiction of federal courts: an actual case or controversy must exist between the parties at all stages of the federal court proceedings,...more
The Federal Circuit just issued a decision that confirms its stance on Article III standing for appeals from inter partes reviews (IPRs), making it tougher for unsuccessful IPR petitioners to obtain judicial review of U.S....more
Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 6,858,650 (the “‘650 Patent”), which is owned by UCB Pharma GmbH (“UCB”) and is directed to chemical derivatives of a drug for treating...more
In Amerigen Pharmaceuticals Limited v. UCB Pharma GmbH, generic drug manufacturer Amerigen appealed a decision of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board finding UCB’s patent to certain chemical derivatives of diphenylpropylamines...more
On August 3, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in JTEKT Corporation v. GKN Automotive Ltd. on the basis that the appellant lacked...more
Today the Supreme Court re-affirmed the validity of the Inter Partes Review (IPR) process in Oil States Energy LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, but also made IPRs a somewhat more stringent process in its decision today in...more
Biosimilar developers have been aggressive in filing petitions for inter partes reviews (IPRs) of biologics patents before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), many of them preceding the filing of a marketing...more
On November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could undermine a key provision in the America Invents Act. Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC (Oils States). The issue...more