Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
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
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | PTAB Update: The Waning Impact of Fintiv on Discretionary Denials
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Discretionary Denials at the PTAB: What to Expect? - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Fish Post Grant Radio: Episode #16: Kevin McNish, McNish PLLC
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #15: Nick Tsui, Alston & Bird
Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #14: Tom Rozylowicz
Fish Post-Grant Radio: Episode #13: Rick Bisenius
JONES DAY TALKS®: Supreme Court Rules on Constitutionality of Administrative Patent Judges
Five Impactful USPTO Procedural Developments for Patent Practitioners
Jones Day Talks®: Patent Litigation, PTAB, Iancu's Legacy, and Institution Discretion
The Briefing: COVID 19 Bill Stimulates the Economy and Changes in the Intellectual Property Law
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Fallout from the Fintiv Precedential Decision
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - LKQ CORPORATION v. GM GLOBAL TECHNOLOGY OPERATIONS LLC [OPINION] (2021-2348, 5/21/24) Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, and Stark - Stoll,...more
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
In conjunction with the release of the firm's year-in-review report, speakers will offer case summaries and analysis of the significant 2022 appellate rulings discussed in the report. Topics of the featured intellectual...more
Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1828, -1867 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2021) - The Federal Circuit issued two precedential decisions this week—both arising from IPRs filed by Intel against patents owned by...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found, in the context of an appeal from an inter partes review (IPR) decision, that the appellant had Article III standing and affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board)...more
Adidas petitioned for inter partes reviews (IPR) of two Nike patents. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board concluded that Adidas had not met its burden to show that the challenged claims in Nike’s patents were obvious. Adidas...more
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY v. RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORP. Before Lourie, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party has standing to appeal an adverse IPR decision if it has concrete...more
Although the Federal Circuit faced obviousness issues that were simple to resolve in Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., it saw an opportunity to continue to clarify its jurisprudence regarding standing on appeal from an adverse final...more
Grit Energy Solutions, LLC v. Oren Technologies, LLC, Appeal No. 2019-1063 (Fed. Cir.. April 30, 2020). Grit Energy filed a petition for inter partes review against Oren’s U.S. Patent No. 8,585,341 pertaining to systems of...more
SANOFI-AVENTIS U.S., LLC v. FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC - Before Lourie, Moore, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: District courts lack the authority to...more
A weekly summary of the precedential patent-related opinions issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the opinions designated precedential or informative by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more
AVX CORPORATION V. PRESIDIO COMPONENTS, INC. Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent and Trial Appeal Board. Summary: Appellants from an IPR decision to the Federal Circuit must have concrete claims...more
PTAB May Invalidate Claims on Reconsideration Based on Grounds Raised in the Institution Decision that Were Not Originally Instituted - In AC Technologies S.A., V. Amazon.Com, Inc., Blizzard Entertainment, Inc., Appeal No....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a failed inter partes review (IPR) petitioner that maintained a Paragraph III certification had sufficient standing to appeal an adverse decision, but affirmed the...more
In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more
In Amerigen Pharmaceuticals Limited v. UCB Pharma GmbH, generic drug manufacturer Amerigen appealed a decision of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board finding UCB’s patent to certain chemical derivatives of diphenylpropylamines...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Lourie, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A generic pharmaceutical company had standing to appeal the Board’s decision in an IPR that claims of a...more
A recent Federal Circuit decision (DuPont v. Synvina) addressed two key issues in PTAB proceedings: burden shifting and standing to appeal....more
Hyatt v. Pato (No. 2017-1722, 9/24/18) (Reyna, Wallach, Hughes) - Hughes, J. Reversing dismissal for lack of subject matter description stating, “the exclusive jurisdiction of this court and the Eastern Virginia district...more
The Federal Circuit has reversed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,865,921 (the “’921 Patent”) were not shown to be obvious, finding that the PTAB applied the...more
Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more
Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit dismissed for lack of standing an appeal filed by an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner of a final written decision issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that held two...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Dyk, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent and Trial Appeal Board. Summary: An IPR petitioner lacks standing to appeal an adverse decision by the Board if it sells no infringing...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Wallach, O’Malley, and Schall. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: PGR petitioner has standing to appeal PTAB decision, where petitioner intended to file an ANDA for...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Newman, Clevenger, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The USPTO has standing to intervene to defend its decision, even when the requestor has...more