News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation Patent Trial and Appeal Board Abstract Ideas

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2024 #2

Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd., Appeal No. 2022-2216 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 6, 2024) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit confirmed the invalidity of all claims of two asserted patents as...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

An Empirical Study of Low Allowance Rate Examiners

Any patent attorney who has been in the business for more than a few years understands from experience that some USPTO examiners are tougher than others.  This should not be surprising, as each examiner is an individual who...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: District Court’s “Seemingly Siloed and Inflexible Approach” to Obviousness “Ran Afoul” of KSR

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1.  JANSSEN PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. [OPINION] (2022-1258, 2022-1307, 4/1/2024) (Dyk, Prost, and Hughes) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs, April 2024: PTAB’s Analogous Art Finding Upheld by Federal Circuit, Blockchain Gemstone Identifying Process Patent...

Erise IP on

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: Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Analogous Art Finding - As IP Watchdog...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

2023 Federal Circuit Case Summaries - Intellectual Property: Year End Report

We are pleased to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural “Year in Review” report that collects and reports on most key patent law-related Federal Circuit decisions for 2023. This is a follow up to the quarterly report we...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Patent Claims to a System for Drilling a Well Found Ineligible Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently found unpatentable claims that are directed to a processor-based system for drilling a well that selects a desired path for the wellbore based on factors such as curvature,...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Struggling to Master the Alice Two-Step: Search Result Display Ineligible for Patent Protection

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a lawsuit involving two software patents directed toward enhancements to search result displays, finding that both patents claimed...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Senior Circuit Judge Issues Split Decision on Patent Eligibility of Claims Directed to Restricting Access to Computer Files

Senior Circuit Judge Bryson of the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation in the District of Delaware, recently granted-in-part and denied-in-part a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment based on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Should This Be an Alice Two-Step or a Section 112 Enablement Waltz?

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit for lack of subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 based on an Alice two-step analysis, with Judge Newman filing a sharp dissent...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Stick to the original idea in reissues

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - IN RE: FLOAT'N'GRILL LLC [OPINION] (2022-1438, 7/12/2023) (Prost, Linn, and Cunningham) - Linn, J. The Court affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision “affirming the...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2021

Knobbe Martens on

No Assembly, No Infringement – Federal Circuit Declines to Expand the “Final Assembler” Theory of Direct Infringement In Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Appeal No. 20-1700 the Federal Circuit held that...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2021

Knobbe Martens on

It’s No Secret That a Related Company’s Physical Presence in a Jurisdiction May Not Be Enough For Proper Venue - In Andra Group, LP v. Victoria’s Secret Stores, LLC, Appeal No. 20-2009, The Federal Circuit held that an...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

MyMail, Ltd. v. ooVoo, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Two years ago, MyMail and ooVoo went to the mat in the Federal Circuit over claims that the District Court for the Northern District of California found ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Patent holder MyMail was able to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2021 #3

Trimble Inc. v. PerDiemCo LLC, Appeal No. 2019-2164 (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2021) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit revisited its decision in Red Wing Shoe Co. v. Hockerson-Halberstadt, Inc., 148 F.3d 1355...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Stanford’s Method for Inferring Haplotype Phase is Not Patent Eligible

Stanford University applied for a U.S. patent for statistical methods of predicting haplotype phase. In 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board rejected the application as ineligible subject matter. Last week, a panel of the...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Improvements to Determinations of Haplotype Phase Patent Ineligible Under § 101

In In re: Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University (“Stanford”), No. 2020-1012 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 11, 2021), the Federal Circuit was presented another opportunity to analyze patent-eligible subject matter.  In...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Set Phase to Subject Matter Ineligible: More Accurate Haplotype Phase Method Still Abstract

In an appeal from a final rejection of a pending application, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that claims directed to methods for determining “haplotype phase” were correctly rejected as subject matter...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - February 2021

Knobbe Martens on

Evidence Supports Prior Art’s Public Accessibility but Not the Board’s Adoption of an Unpresented Theory of Anticipation - In M & K Holdings, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co.,Ltd., Appeal No. 20-1160, the Federal Circuit...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Method for Determining Haplotype Phase Found Subject Matter Ineligible

McDermott Will & Emery on

In an appeal from a final rejection of a pending application, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that claims directed to methods for determining “haplotype phase” were correctly rejected under 35 USC § 101...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Patent Directed to Countering Credit Card Fraud is an Invalid Abstract Idea Under Section 101

Holland & Knight LLP on

In the case of In Re: SARADA MOHAPATRA, Appellant, No. 2020-1935, 2021 WL 408755 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 5, 2021), Sarada Mohapatra sought to overturn a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), holding that his patent...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Stupid § 101 Tricks

If we have learned anything from the last six-and-a-half years of patent eligibility jurisprudence, it is that nobody knows what's going on. Subject matter eligibility is a fundamental requirement for an invention to be...more

Troutman Pepper

Federal Circuit Review - Issue 274

Troutman Pepper on

274-1 Federal Circuit Revisits American Axle & Manufacturing; Case Remanded to Determine if One of the “Hooke’s Law” Claims is Ineligible under Other Theories of Eligibility - The Federal Circuit recently issued a modified...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Zunshine (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the rejection by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of claims 1-3 of U.S. Patent Application No. 15/726,162 as being patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  The '162 application, which...more

Knobbe Martens

USPTO Guidance Cannot Modify or Supplant the Alice/Mayo Framework

Knobbe Martens on

IN RE: CHRISTOPHER JOHN RUDY - Before Prost, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Patent and Trademark Office’s October 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Rudy (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Claims Directed to Selecting Fishing Hooks for Use Are Not Patentable - Christopher John Rudy, represented pro se, appealed from a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("Board") affirming the rejection of claims...more

80 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

"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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide