4 Key Takeaways | Trade Secret Update 2024 Legal Developments and Trends
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | Corporate Perspectives on Intellectual Property
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
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
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
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - U.S. State Data Privacy Update
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Platinum Optics Tech. Inc. v. Viavi Solutions Inc., 2024 WL 3836107 (Fed. Cir. 2024) - On August 24, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) dismissed an appeal for lack of standing after a...more
As we move into the second half of the year, we are alerting you to 11 patent cases that you should look out for during the second half of 2024. This judicial mix touches on a range of industries and interests, such as...more
In ZyXEL, the petitioner unexpectedly received a second chance to argue against the patentability of the patentee’s substitute claims, even though the U.S. Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) had already found those claims...more
In a recent opinion, the Federal Circuit added several new wrinkles to amendment practice in inter partes review proceedings. The court affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s determination that most of the original...more
2: Finding Your Outside Team - This is the second in a series of articles that explores considerations and suggested actions for in-house counsel who are inexperienced in patent litigation, yet facing such a suit. The first...more
A trio of cases this past year illustrate a trend of increasing importance in the power of Patent-Office rulemaking and enforcement, and the influence it has on patent owners and challengers alike....more
On February 8, in Weber, Inc. v. Provisur Technologies, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and held that Weber’s operating manuals are prior art printed publications despite their...more
This Year in Review synthesizes key events and decisions from 2023 into a digestible guide that we hope will serve as a helpful reference for those who practice before, or adjacent to, the PTAB. As in the past, many of our...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent precedential decision in Parus Holdings v. Google underscores the importance of complying with the PTAB’s procedural rules in an IPR and the potentially serious consequences of not doing so. The...more
Addressing for the first time the standard and burden of proof for the “reasonably could have raised” requirement for inter partes review (IPR) estoppel to apply, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that...more
Director Katherine Vidal of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a precedential review decision with respect to the interpretation of multiple dependent claims, in a case of first impression before the...more
On March 6, in Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review (IPR) invalidating claims of the...more
CyWee Group Ltd. (“CyWee”) has been bouncing between the Federal Circuit and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) with its administrative challenges after two inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings invalidated the claims...more
With the continuing advancements of cutting-edge technologies — such as genome editing (CRISPR) and Non-Fungible Tokens (NFTs) — U.S. courts will have a full docket of challenging IP cases throughout 2023. Below are some of...more
It isn’t every day that the literal landscape of patent litigation changes radically with the stroke of a pen. Monday, July 25, 2022 was such a day. That’s when Chief Judge Orlando H. Garcia of the U.S. District Court for the...more
On June 21, 2022, US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) Director Katherine K. Vidal issued a memorandum addressing interim procedures for discretionary denials in America Invents Act (AIA)-post grant proceedings at the Patent...more
On March 24, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit criticized the Precedential Opinion Panel's application of its standard for when it is (and isn't) appropriate for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to sua...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
On February 1, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit held that Apple could not base an inter partes review (IPR) challenge of a Qualcomm patent solely on “applicant admitted prior art” (AAPA) found in the patent...more
Some of the most significant current issues in patent litigation have been percolating for years: patent eligibility, venue, and inter partes review proceedings. In this post, we consider guidance on patent eligibility;...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit issued a decision holding that parties can contractually bargain away their rights to file petitions for Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“the Board”). This...more
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
On December 28, in Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may not decline to consider the patentability of a claim challenged in an inter partes review (IPR)...more
On November 10, in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated, for the second time, and in a 2-1 decision by a different panel, the Federal Circuit held that Apple lacked standing to appeal final decisions in inter partes review...more
In this second edition of Orrick’s quarterly series on the PTAB, we summarize the Arthrex decision, walk through the PTO’s post-Arthrex interim procedure for reviewing PTAB decisions, and discuss potential post-Arthrex...more