Latest Posts › Patent Infringement

Share:

Avoiding the Provisional Application Filing Pitfall of Narrowed Claim Interpretation

Provisional patent applications are popular in the U.S. for the various advantages they may provide applicants, including lower filing costs, less restrictive United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) filing...more

A Typo to Remember: Erroneous Patent Number in Terminal Disclaimer Destroys Exclusive Rights

Co-authored by Sam Cohen, Summer Associate 2024. On May 29, 2024, the Western District of Oklahoma in SIPCO, LLC v. JASCO Prods. Co. dismissed the plaintiff SIPCO’s patent infringement claims against defendant JASCO because...more

Year in Review: The Most Popular IP Posts of 2022

As 2023 begins and intellectual property (IP) strategies are being developed for the new year, it is a good time to reflect on what IP issues were prominent in 2022. According to many readers, hot IP topics included entity...more

Effect of A Restriction Requirement on Prosecution History Estoppel

The decision whether to issue a Restriction Requirement during patent prosecution lies with the patent examiner, not the patent applicant. A Restriction Requirement can nevertheless trigger prosecution history estoppel that...more

Patent Claim Preamble Lessons from Arctic Cat Inc. v. GEP Power Products

The general rule is that a patent claim’s preamble does not limit the claim unless the preamble gives life, meaning, and vitality to the claim. The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Arctic Cat Inc. v. GEP Power Products,...more

Lessons about Prosecution History Estoppel and Design Patents from Advantek Marketing, Inc. v. Shanghai Walk-Long Tools Co.

Patent practitioners are probably well familiar with circumstances in which prosecution history estoppel can limit the scope of a U.S. utility patent’s claims. Examples include claim amendments and statements made by the...more

Patent Exhaustion Defense Unavailable to Reseller after Impression Products

In an application of 2017 U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Impressions Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Intern., Inc., the Northern District California in International Fruit Genetics LLC v. Orcharddepot.com, No. 4:17-cv-02905-JSW,...more

Year in Review: The Most Popular Blog Posts of 2017

As 2018 begins and IP strategies are being developed for the new year, it is a good time to reflect on what IP issues were prominent in 2017. According to the many readers of Global IP Matters, hot topics included navigating...more

The Federal Circuit Newly Recognizes Patent-Agent Privilege

On March 7, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recognized “a patent-agent privilege extending to communications with non-attorney patent agents when those agents are acting within the agent’s authorized...more

Kyle Bass’ Another Three IPRs: Targeting Anacor

Kyle Bass continues to make waves throughout the pharmaceutical industry. Since Bass founded Coalition for Affordable Drugs X LLC (“CFAD”) to challenge pharmaceutical patents, CFAD has filed over three dozen petitions as of...more

Inphi v. Netlist: Alternative Features Satisfy the Patent Written Description Requirement for a Negative Claim Limitation

It can be tricky to evaluate written description support under 35 U.S.C. § 112 for negative claim limitations since the support may amount to the absence of a feature from an invention that is described positively with...more

Application Drafting Dangers Highlighted by Pacing Technologies v. Garmin International

The general rule is that a patent claim’s preamble does not limit the claim unless the preamble breathes life and meaning into the claim. The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Pacing Techs. v. Garmin Int’l, No. 2014-1396...more

12 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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