The Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) established the interim process for Director Review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in...more
On June 13, 2022, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion that vacated the district court’s judgment of indefiniteness, deciding that the ruling was based on an erroneous claim construction. The patents-in-suit...more
Last week was argument week at the Federal Circuit, and we’ve already begun seeing decisions from the argued cases trickle in. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and a detailed discussion of our case of the week—our...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
Last week, a split Federal Circuit panel reversed a decision invalidating certain computer-aided-design patent claims because the district court used an incorrect indefiniteness standard....more
On December 8, 2021, the Federal Circuit in AztraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharms. Inc. held that the claim construction of a percentage term should “‘most naturally align[] with the patent’s description of the invention,’ as...more
In the second appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the preamble term “three-dimensional spreadsheet” was found to be a limitation in the context of claims directed to organizing and presenting...more
In Seabed Geosolutions (US) Inc. v. Magseis FF LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded an inter partes review decision for the Patent Owner. The Court held that the Patent Trial and Review Board failed to perform the...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
Although things often slow down in Washington in the August heat and humidity, that wasn’t the case this past week for the Federal Circuit. All told, the Court issued 5 precedential opinions and ruled in 17 cases. Below we...more
The Federal Circuit announced last week that it will resume in-person oral arguments later this summer. The Court’s new protocols generally take effect with the September 2021 sitting, and we noticed that the Court has also...more
In post-grant proceedings since 2018, the PTAB has applied the same claim construction standard as used in district court; a recent Memorandum confirms the PTAB will likewise apply the same standard that district courts use...more
Indefiniteness under U.S. patent law is a failure to satisfy the statutory requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), which reads: "The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly...more
Trial courts tend to get more than the benefit of the doubt when their decisions are viewed under the "abuse of discretion" standard, and juries similarly are affirmed unless there isn't substantial evidence supporting their...more
In the context of Immunex’s patent on IL-4 antibodies, the Federal Circuit says yes. On October 13, 2020, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (the “Board”) final written decision in...more
Claims Covering Human Engineering That Exploit a Naturally-Occurring Phenomenon Are Patent Eligible - In Illumina, Inc. V. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., Appeal No. 19-1419, the Federal Circuit modified its earlier decision...more
Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 2019-1527, (Fed. Cir. Aug 27, 2020) - In an appeal from the District of Delaware, the Federal Circuit (Judges Moore, Plager, and Wallach) vacated and remanded the district court’s judgment...more
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a district court’s construction of the terms “antibody” and “antibody fragment.” The court’s constructions were not consistent with the claim language, and nothing in the specification or...more
NEVILLE v. FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTORS, INC. Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed a construction of...more
IBSA INSTITUT BIOCHIMIQUE, S.A. V. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware - Summary: A term may be indefinite when the proposed construction is not...more
PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATION, LLC v. APPLE INC - Before Reyna, Taranto and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Prosecution history evidence need not rise to the level of disclaimer to...more
The Federal Circuit has issued another opinion arising from the patent conflict between The Chamberlain Group and Techtronic Industries—and, once again, a patent owned by Chamberlain suffered a major blow. In Techtronic...more
It is important for petitioners and patent owners alike to understand the implications of Curver Luxembourg v. Home Expressions, which relied on prosecution history and the title to limit design patent claim scope....more
Addressing the applicability of 35 USC § 112, ¶6 to the term “mechanical control assembly,” the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) gave undue weight to the patent’s...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