News & Analysis as of

Google Obviousness Patents

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | February 2024

Knobbe Martens on

The Outcome of the PTAB’s Analysis May Determine Whether the PTAB Engaged in Claim Construction - In Google LLC v. Ecofactor, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1750, the Federal Circuit held that the outcome of the PTAB’s analysis of...more

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

“AI-Related” Chip Patents - 1.6 Billion Reasons Why Google May Have Agreed to Settle

Recent headlines have focused on the $1.6 billion damages claim and Google’s possible exposure in Singular Computing’s patent infringement lawsuit involving Google’s “AI-related” chips. $1.6 billion is certainly not chump...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

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

Knobbe Martens

Raise It or Lose It! The Federal Circuit Will Not Address Obviousness Arguments First Raised by the PTO on Appeal

Knobbe Martens on

In Re Google LLC - Before: Moore, Lourie, and Prost. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTO’s arguments on appeal did not reflect the record below....more

Haug Partners LLP

Google v. Hammond: IPR and Collateral Estoppel

Haug Partners LLP on

On December 8 2022, the Federal Circuit in Google LLC v. Hammond Development Int’l, Inc. affirmed in part and reversed in part the PTAB’s final written decision of an IPR holding that Google failed to prove that certain...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions: In re Google Tech. Holdings LLC, 980 F.3d 858...

Google applied for a patent on video-on-demand systems. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board affirmed the examiner’s rejection of the claims as obvious, stating that Google’s responses to the examiner’s rejections were...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more

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

Claim Construction Arguments in Appeal Forfeited if Not Raised Before the Board

In In re: Google Technology Holdings LLC, No. 2019-1828 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 13, 2020), the Federal Circuit elaborated on the policies underlying waiver and forfeiture of appellate arguments.  Ultimately, the court affirmed the...more

Knobbe Martens

Claim Construction Arguments Not Made to the PTAB Are Forfeited on Appeal

Knobbe Martens on

IN RE: GOOGLE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS LLC - Before Taranto, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claim construction arguments are forfeited if not raised before the PTAB. The PTAB...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: PTAB May Not Institute on Grounds Left out of IPR Petition

The Federal Circuit recently addressed whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) can institute inter partes review (IPR) on a ground not advanced by the petitioner, as well as whether the general knowledge of a person...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2020

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google LLC, et al., Appeal No. 2019-1177 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 30, 2020) - In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential decision this week, the Court affirmed a PTAB finding...more

Troutman Pepper

The Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art Still Counts

Troutman Pepper on

Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google LLC et al., Appeal No. 2019-1177 (Fed. Cir., January 30, 2020). Google filed an IPR against Philips’ patent relating to a method of forming a media presentation on a client device from...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Examiner’s Reason for Allowance May Be Sufficient to Show Prosecution Disclaimer

McDermott Will & Emery on

While affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision to invalidate a patent as obvious, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB incorrectly concluded that an examiner’s statements in a...more

Knobbe Martens

Simpleair, Inc. v. Google, LLC.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Lourie, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Judge J. Rodney Gilstrap. Summary: Filing a terminal disclaimer to overcome an...more

McDermott Will & Emery

To Teach Away, Prior Art Must Criticize, Discredit or Discourage the Invention

Addressing issues of obviousness in the context of an asserted teaching away, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision finding that the challenged claims were...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Federal Circuit Emphasizes that an Obviousness Analysis Based on Common Sense Must be Supported by Substantial Evidence and...

A recent decision by the Federal Circuit suggests that relying on “common sense” in analyzing whether a patent is obvious in view of prior art cannot always be based on common sense alone. In a decision providing...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | May 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Construes Claim Term in a Manner that Rendered Claim Language Superfluous - In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Commc’ns AB, Appeal No. 2015-1251, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s...more

17 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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