New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Inter Partes Review: Validity Before the PTAB
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s determination that 79 challenged composition claims across three related patents were unpatentable but reversed the Board’s...more
Affirming the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s final determination that three claims were invalid for obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a “plausible alternative understanding” of the prior...more
Mirror Worlds Technologies, LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-1600, -1709 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 4, 2024) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Federal...more
Patent owners with robust continuation filing strategies can breathe a sigh of relief as the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) has withdrawn a proposed rule, which would have weakened patents linked to one...more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has withdrawn a proposed rule for filing terminal disclaimers to overcome obviousness-type double patenting rejections. The proposed rule would likely have had wide...more
Patent owners generally look to secondary indicia to bolster their nonobvious defenses when prior art and/or knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) seem to make the obviousness decision a close call. This...more
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: USPTO Director Vidal to Step Down - On November 12, Under Secretary of...more
Case Name: Purdue Pharma L.P v. Accord Healthcare Inc., Civ. No. 22-913-WCB, 2024 WL 4120717 (D. Del. Sept 9, 2024) (Bryson, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: OxyContin® (oxycodone HCl); U.S. Patent No. 11,304,908 (“the...more
The basis for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) is found in 35 U.S.C. § 101, establishing an applicant is entitled to a single patent, “a patent” or the “first” patent, for an invention....more
A recent decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) sheds light on certain pitfalls patent applicants may encounter when submitting declarations under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132 (“Rule 132 Declarations”). Rule 132...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 24-1061 (Fed. Cir. 2024), holding that “a first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim cannot...more
Please join Fitch Even for a free webinar, “Navigating the Changes to the Test for Obviousness in Design Patents After LKQ Corp. v. GM Global,” on Tuesday, October 29, at 9:00 a.m. PDT / 10:00 a.m. MDT / 11:00 a.m. CDT / 12...more
On August 13, the Federal Circuit, in Allergan USA, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., held that a “first-filed, first-issued, later-expiring claim cannot be invalidated by a later-filed, later-issued, earlier-expiring...more
The Supreme Court denies Cellect LLC's petition for certiorari to consider whether patent term adjustment ("PTA") should be included in patent term for obviousness-type double patenting ("ODP") purposes....more
Earlier this year, Merck Sharp & Dohme, LLC (“Merck”) requested inter partes review (“IPR”) of a number of patents owned by the Johns Hopkins University (“JHU”). ...more
Suppose you have a design for an ornamental appearance of an article and start producing the article. Subsequently, you receive notice from an owner of a design patent that you are infringing their patent. You conduct a prior...more
The PTAB denied institution of inter partes review reasoning that Petitioner did not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood that Petitioner would prevail in establishing the unpatentability of any of the challenged claims. The...more
United States District Judge Pamela K. Chen (E.D.N.Y.) recently granted Plaintiff Shaf International, Inc. (“Shaf”)’s motion for summary judgment of validity of U.S. Patent No. 10,433,598 (the “’598 Patent”) and Defendant...more
The Federal Circuit overturned its 42-year-old obviousness test for designs. Fashion companies, take note. The shape of a handbag, the red sole of a shoe: for fashion companies, design patents have long played a role in...more
On August 6, 2024, the PTAB issued its first written decision applying a new test for obviousness of design patents. In Next Step Group, Inc. v. Deckers Outdoor Corp., IPR2024-00525, Paper 16 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 6, 2024)...more
In Allergan USA, Inc. et al., v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., et al., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision relating to obviousness-type double patenting (“ODP”) and...more
One of the anticipated consequences of the Supreme Court's Loper decision is that it will unleash judges to impose their statutory interpretations of administrative agencies' applications of the law within their areas of...more
Before Dyk, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: An expert witness can testify from the perspective of a POSITA at the time of the invention even if they...more
Specify the Steps of Information Manipulation or Lose under § 101 - In Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd. Appeal No. 22-2216, the Federal Circuit held that patent claims that merely recite result-orientated, functional...more
Allergan USA v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., No. 2024-1061 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 13, 2024) - On August 13, 2024, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s decision that a patent was invalid for obviousness-type double...more