News & Analysis as of

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter › Final Written Decisions › Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a... more +
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a researcher discovers a naturally occurring substance, the substance itself cannot be patented. This issue was examined in a United States Supreme Court case, AMP v. Myriad, in regard to the patentability of human genes.  less -
Jones Day

Shifting Burden Dooms Patent Owner

Jones Day on

In a Final Written Decision, the PTAB declared claims of a patent unpatentable after finding the patent was not entitled to the earlier priority date of the anticipatory reference in Platinum Optics Technology, Inc. v. Viavi...more

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Federal Circuit Finds No Motive to Combine in Laser Projector Patent Case

AEON Law on

The Federal Circuit has reversed a finding by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) that certain challenged claims of a patent for a method for aligning a laser projector with respect to a work surface are...more

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

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

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

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

McDermott Will & Emery

2022 IP Outlook Report: The Developments Shaping Patent Law

McDermott Will & Emery on

KEY TAKEAWAYS AND OUTLOOK FOR 2022 - Tracking with this era’s continuation and uncertainty trends―global supply chain disruption, innovation outpacing legislation, the unstoppable internet of [all the] things (IoT)―2022 is...more

Goodwin

Issue Twenty-Nine: PTAB Trial Tracker

Goodwin on

The availability of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has changed the face of patent litigation. This monthly digest is designed to keep you up-to-date by highlighting interesting PTAB,...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Dead on Arrival? Federal Circuit Majority Finds That Substitute Claims Live On (Uniloc v. Hulu: Part 1)

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

Last week a Federal Circuit panel in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC issued an important decision regarding inter partes review (IPR) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on two questions concerning contingent motions to...more

Knobbe Martens

Substitute Claims in IPR Are Subject to Section 101 Challenges

Knobbe Martens on

UNILOC 2017 LLC v. HULU, LLC - Before O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. O’Malley dissenting. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board did not exceed its statutory authority in an inter partes...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - May 2020

Knobbe Martens on

IPR Petitioners May Not Raise Appointments Clause Challenges Under Arthrex - In CIENA CORPORATION v. OYSTER OPTICS, LLC, Appeal No. 19-2117, affirmatively petitioning for IPR waived the petitioner’s Appointments Clause...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

PTAB - 2019 Year in Review

Foley & Lardner LLP on

To wrap up 2019 and usher in 2020 for practitioners who handle Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) matters, Foley partners Jeanne Gills, Steve Maebius, and George Quillin discussed 2019’s major developments in a webinar on...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2019

Knobbe Martens on

The Appointments Clause: Ensuring That PTAB Decisions Are Subject to Constitutional Checks and Balances  In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2251, the Federal Circuit ruled that, under the then-existing...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Invalidity Defenses Will Not Be Stricken at Pleading Stage Despite Defendant’s Earlier PGR Petition

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

A district court has denied a patent owner’s motion to strike wholesale a defendant’s affirmative defense of invalidity. The key issue in the motion to strike was the application of the estoppel provision of 35 U.S.C. §...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit: Skepticism of FDA Supports Finding of Nonobviousness and Patent Eligibility Not Within Scope of Appeal of an IPR

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2019

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Duncan Parking Techs., Inc. v. IPS Group, Inc. and IPS Group, Inc. v. Duncan Solutions, Inc. et al., Appeal Nos. 2018-1205, -1360 (Fed. Cir. January 31, 2019) - The Court this week provided a...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Estoppel Applies to “Known or Used” Prior Art if PTAB Considered Corresponding Written References

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

A district court in California has granted-in-part a Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of no invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 103 due to inter partes review (IPR) estoppel. During the pendency of the litigation, Defendants...more

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

The Goods on IP - July 2018: Design Patent PTO Litigation Statistics (Through July 19, 2018)

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

The statistics below reveal the current trends on proceeding breakdowns, institution rates, and outcomes of design patent PTO litigation. Two new design petitions have been filed since May – the first since April 2017. Two...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Accused Infringer Estopped from Asserting Prior Art Disclosed in Invalidity Contentions

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on

In an order issued on April 4, 2018, Judge Lynn granted plaintiff ZitoVault’s motion for summary judgment under 35 U.S.C. 315(e)(2), holding that defendant IBM is estopped from asserting invalidity defenses based on prior art...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | May 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Affirms Different Invalidity Results at PTAB and District Court - In Novartis AG v. Noven Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal Nos. 2016-1678, 2016-1679, the Federal Circuit held that prior judicial opinions...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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide