The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently invalidated a University of Massachusetts (“UMass”) patent related to the treatment of the skin disease vitiligo in a post-grant review. (See Forte Biosciences Inc v....more
Claim terms are usually given their ordinary meaning in light of the intrinsic evidence, but what if the ordinary meaning of two claim terms presents an obvious contradiction? That is the issue that the Federal Circuit will...more
The Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) finding that a combination of prior art references requires only an implicit indication of a reasonable expectation of success. ...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board ruling that method claims reciting a mechanism of action triggered by the co-administration of two known antihypertensive agents were...more
Hosted by ACI, 18th Annual Paragraph IV Disputes Conference returns to New York City for another exciting year with curated programming that not only addresses the hot topics, but also puts them within the context of pre-suit...more
In Bell Semiconductor, LLC v. Omnivision Technologies, Inc., 8-22-cv-01979 (CDCA Mar. 1, 2023)( John A. Kronstadt), the Court granted the Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s indirect patent infringement claims for...more
If patent holders want to exclude others from using their invention, then they need to keep an eye on the marketplace to spot infringers. Because the metaverse opens up a new, virtual and potentially endless space where...more
CHEVRON U.S.A. INC. v. UNIVERSITY OF WYOMING RESEARCH - Before Newman, Lourie, and Schall. Appeal from Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Intrinsic evidence is sufficient support for claim construction in an...more
In GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit reinstated a jury's verdict that Teva infringed GSK's patented method of using its Coreg® drug product, even though Teva's product was initially...more
XY, LLC v. TRANS OVA GENETICS, LC - Before Wallach, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Summary: Claims directed to improving a method of operating an apparatus...more
In XY, LLC v. Trans Ova Genetics, LC (Case 2019-1789, issued July 31, 2020), the Federal Circuit provided another example of a life sciences method claim avoiding patent ineligibility under the Alice framework at step one,...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent decisions in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC have not clarified the standard for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (see a previous analysis of § 101’s...more
272-1 Federal Circuit Holds a New Invalidity Challenge at the ITC is not a Change in Condition that Enables the ITC to review the Validity of a Patent or Rescind an Exclusion Order - The Federal Circuit (Court) recently...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1763 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2019) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit considered whether patent...more
In a case relating to methods for genotyping a canine breed, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s judgment as a matter of law that the asserted claims were not subject matter eligible...more
AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING, INC. v. NEAPCO HOLDINGS LLC - Before Dyk, Moore, Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Mechanical method claims involving tuning...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding, based largely on the prosecution history, that disputed “wherein” clauses were limiting and therefore the grant of a preliminary injunction...more
The Federal Circuit has affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board finding nonobvious the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,772,209 (the “’209 Patent”), which are directed to a method of treating cancer. The claims...more
Addressing the patentability of method-of-treatment claims, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued two decision finding such claims patent eligible. Natural Alternatives Int’l, Inc. v. Creative Compounds, LLC,...more
In Cleveland Clinic Foundation, Cleveland Heartlab, Inc. v. True Health Diagnostics LLC, (Cleveland Clinic II)[1], a unanimous panel of the Federal Circuit provided yet another guidepost illustrating what is not...more
In Natural Alternatives International, Inc. v. Creative Compounds, LLC., Appeal No. 2018-1295, a divided panel of the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a decision by the District Court for the Southern District of...more
In Natural Alternatives Internat'l v. Creative Compounds, LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court decision that held the asserted claims invalid under 35 USC § 101 at the pleadings stage. I previously wrote about...more
The Federal Circuit weighed in on patent subject matter eligibility again last week, finding certain amino-acid containing dietary supplements, and related methods of use, to be patent eligible. In Natural Alternatives Int’l...more
In Natural Alternatives Intl. v. Creative Compounds, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a decision by a lower court finding claims directed to dietary supplements containing beta-alanine...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Natural Alternatives Int’l v. Creative Compounds, LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1295 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 15, 2019) In an appeal from a judgment on the pleadings, the Federal Circuit reversed, issuing an...more