(Podcast) The Briefing: Trump Train Derailed In “Electric Avenue” Copyright Lawsuit
The Briefing: Trump Train Derailed In “Electric Avenue” Copyright Lawsuit
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Using Innovative Technology to Advance Trial Strategies | Episode 70
(Podcast) The Briefing: “Hold On” – You Can’t Use That Music in Your Presidential Campaign
The Briefing: “Hold On” – You Can’t Use That Music in Your Presidential Campaign
(Podcast) The Briefing: Punchbowl News’ Trademark Win Despite Rogers Setback
The Briefing: Punchbowl News’ Trademark Win Despite Rogers Setback
NCAA Settlement Hearing — Highway to NIL Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: Does This Court’s Ruling Put an End to Tattoo Copyright Cases?
The Briefing: Does This Court’s Ruling Put an End to Tattoo Copyright Cases?
Work This Way: A Labor & Employment Law Podcast - Episode 31: Trade Secrets and Protecting Confidential Information with Jennie Cluverius of Maynard Nexsen
4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing – Late Night, Early Dismissal: The Santos-Kimmel Copyright Case
(Podcast) The Briefing: Deep Dive into the NO FAKES Act
The Briefing: Deep Dive into the NO FAKES Act
(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
Intellectual property considerations for launching new cannabis products
Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: SCOTUS Won’t Hear Challenge to PTAB’s Fintiv Rule- The U.S. Supreme...more
Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1461 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 20, 2023) Our Case of the Week focuses on the enablement requirement. It’s the first case to come before the Federal Circuit following the Supreme...more
United Therapeutics Corporation v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-2217, 2023-1021 (Fed. Cir. July 24, 2023) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent case this week, the Court considered questions...more
With the continuing advancements of cutting-edge technologies — such as genome editing (CRISPR) and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) — U.S. courts will have a full docket of challenging IP cases throughout 2023. Below are some of...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Recently, the Supreme Court received two petitions for writ of certiorari challenging the NHK-Fintiv rule. The PTAB applies the NHK-Fintiv rule when deciding whether to grant institution of an inter partes review. The two...more
[co-author: Jay Bober, Summer Associate] The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for...more
On June 29th, the PTO issued an initial protocol for requesting Director review of a PTAB Final Written Decision according to the Supreme Court’s Arthrex decision. This Arthrex protocol is similar to the current procedure...more
Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the constitutionality of inter partes review proceedings (IPRs) challenging patents issued before the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA). ...more
Most readers have been following the impact of the Federal Circuit’s decision in Arthrex and know that an earlier and less developed Arthrex I case is on cert to the Supreme Court asking the Court to address the appointments...more
General Electric Co. v. Raytheon Technologies Corporation, fka United Technologies Corporation, Case No. 19-1012. On February 24, 2020, we reported on GE’s petition for certiorari to the Supreme Court....more
After the Supreme Court’s 2019 decision in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 139 S. Ct. 1853 (2019), held that federal agencies are not “persons” eligible to challenge a patent at the PTAB, the government was...more
PART 1: IP ISSUES CURRENTLY PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT - In the first part of our series, we briefly summarize the intellectual property issues that the Supreme Court has already agreed to address in 2020. In...more
On June 20, 2019, the United States Supreme Court held that government entities could not be considered “persons” entitled to challenge patents owned by others before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more
Recently, the Federal Circuit issued a series of decisions that address the rights and immunities that the federal and state government have when they become party to a post-grant proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
In Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Serv., 17-1594, Justice SOTOMAYOR wrote for the majority to overturn a Federal Circuit decision that the U.S. Postal Service had standing to petition for covered business method review. The...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
The Supreme Court ruled in Return Mail that a federal agency is not a "person" who may challenge an issued patent in inter partes review, post-grant review, or CBM review under the AIA. In its 6–3 decision in Return Mail,...more
In a 6-3 opinion authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court held that the Federal Government is not a “person” capable of petitioning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) to institute patent review proceedings...more
On June 10, 2019 the United States Supreme Court held in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, 587 U.S. ____ (2019) that agencies of the federal government cannot challenge the validity of a patent via USPTO...more
In a recent 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court held that the U.S. Postal Service and other federal agencies are prohibited from challenging the validity of patents post-issuance under the proceedings created by the Leahy-Smith...more
On June 10, 2019 in a 6-to-3 decision, Return Mail v. United States Postal Service, No. 17–1594, the U.S. Supreme Court decided that, based on principles of statutory interpretation, a federal agency is not a “person” that...more
The Supreme Court ruled Monday in a 6-3 decision that federal agencies may not file America Invents Act (AIA) petitions at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service et al.,...more
Earlier this week, the United States Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s finding that the government is a “person” eligible to petition for post-issuance AIA review proceedings. This 6-3 decision, Return Mail, Inc....more
The validity of a patent can be challenged in four different types of proceedings: ex parte reexamination, inter partes review, post grant review, and covered business method review. An ex parte reexamination is initiated by...more