Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Behaving Badly: OpenSky v. VLSI and Sanctions at the PTAB — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Scott McKeown Discusses PTAB Trends and Growth of Wolf Greenfield’s Washington, DC Office
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Noteworthy Points in the Rules for the Implementation of China's Patent Law 2023
5 Key Takeaways | Best Practices in Patent Drafting: Addressing 112 and Enablement after Amgen
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
Intellectual Property In Department of Defense Contracting
On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that, if enacted, would tie the enforceability of every claim of a patent subject to a terminal disclaimer to the...more
On May 10, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that proposes a rule regarding new requirements for terminal disclaimers filed to obviate nonstatutory...more
On December 26, 2023, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in K-Fee System GMBH v. Nespresso USA, Inc. While nominally a case related to coffee makers, its teachings are highly...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s claim construction and related summary judgment rulings after determining that the district court erred in construing a claim term by...more
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. VLSI TECHNOLOGY LLC v. INTEL CORPORATION [OPINION] (2021-1826, 11/15/22) (Chen, Bryson, Hughes) - Bryson, J. Affirming in part, reversing in part, and remanding...more
OVERVIEW - The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed three Inter Partes Review (IPR) final written decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) where the Board...more
INVT SPE LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 2020-1903 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 31, 2022) - In its only precedential patent case last week, the Federal Circuit issued a lengthy opinion that revolved around claims that are drawn...more
GENUINE ENABLING TECHNOLOGY LLC V. NINTENDO CO., LTD - Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Western District of Washington. Summary: A finding of prosecution disclaimer must be supported by an unambiguous...more
In Akeva L.L.C., v. Nike, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a disclaimer in a specification that excluded a particular embodiment prevented later claims in the continuation patents from claiming the excluded embodiment,...more
The Federal Circuit ruled that statutory disclaimer terminates the case or controversy between the parties in an infringement suit as to those claims, and immediately deprives the district court of the authority to take...more
Core Wireless v. LG affirms the denial of summary judgment as to unpatentable subject matter, ruling that the asserted claims are directed to an improved user interface for computing devices, not to the abstract idea of an...more
On September 9, 2017, an Eastern District of Texas magistrate judge issued a report and recommendation holding that a plaintiff was estopped from asserting its patent infringement claims because statements made in response to...more
Federal Circuit holds that patent owner’s statements can trigger prosecution disclaimers. On May 11, 2017 in Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time whether statements made...more
Escaping PTAB Review Through Strategic Disclaimer in CBM Proceedings - A patent is only eligible for covered business method (CBM) review if it: (1) claims a method or apparatus for performing data processing or other...more
Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more
Addressing issues of claim construction, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s narrow construction based on a disclaimer in the specification. Openwave Systems, Inc., NKA...more
On January 29, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an Opinion in Avid Technology, Inc. v. Harmonic, Inc. in which the judgment of the District Court was vacated, and the case was remanded for a new trial on infringement. Avid...more
Addressing the effect of disclaimed claims challenged in an inter partes review (IPR) petition, a panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the PTAB or Board) determined that challenged claims disclaimed prior to IPR...more
In Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that Apotex has standing to seek a declaratory judgment that it does not infringe Daiichi Sankyo’s patent, even though Daiichi Sankyo has disclaimed the patent...more