In the non-precedential decision in In re Eaton, the Federal Circuit reversed the USPTO Board decision affirming rejections of anticipation and obviousness. The court found that the Board decision strayed from its own claim...more
When the Federal Circuit denied Baxter’s petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc in Fresenius USC, Inc. v. Baxter International, Inc., Judge Dyk wrote an opinion concurring in the denial that was joined by Judge...more
In Ohio Willow Wood Co. v. Alps South, LLC, the Federal Circuit found that Ohio Willow Wood had both withheld material information and made material representations during proceedings before the USPTO. Because the district...more
In Sanofi-Aventis v. Pfizer, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the USPTO’s determination that Pfizer had proven an earlier date of invention of the DNA sequence at issue, even though it did not have the full, correct...more
On October 15, 2013, Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC filed a complaint in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia seeking review of the USPTO’s decisions denying petitions to institute inter partes review...more
On October 23, 2014, Congressman Goodlatte (R-VA) introduced the “Innovation Act,” which is intended “to make improvements and technical corrections” to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) “and for other purposes.”...more
Certain USPTO fees are set to decrease on January 1, 2014, including issue fees and the publication fees for utility applications. Also, as of January 1, 2014, certain PCT International Stage fees will have Small Entity and...more
In Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Rea, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia upheld the USPTO Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) rule that provides for a PTA deduction when an applicant files a “supplemental reply...more
In Rambus, Inc. v. Rea, the Federal Circuit found several legal and procedural errors in the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that invalidated certain claims of the Rambus patent as obvious. While...more
William F. Smith of Woodcock Washburn LLP and Joseph Mallon of Knobbe Martens (colleagues on the IPO Patent Office Practice Committee)** have prepared a white paper that encourages us to take a step back from the current U.S....more
As the USPTO fiscal year comes to an end on September 30, I thought this would be a good time to review the USPTO backlog statistics. The currently available data reflects the backlogs as of the start of August 2013, and...more
On September 16, 2013–the second anniversary of the America Invents Act (AIA)–the USPTO will host a forum on the AIA at its Alexandria, Virginia campus. The USPTO AIA forum will provide an overview of AIA implementation to...more
The USPTO website has an IP Awareness Assessment tool that was developed by the USPTO and National Institute of Standards and Technology/Manufacturing Extension Partnership (NIST/MEP) to permit businesses and inventors to...more
In Leo Pharmaceutical Products, Lt. v. Rae, the Federal Circuit issued a rare decision reversing an obviousness determination by the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)....more
In Versata Development Corp. v. Rea, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed Versata’s challenge of the PTAB’s decision to institute post grant review of its patent for lack of jurisdiction....more
The AIA Technical Corrections Act made several changes to the Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) statute, including one that could mean additional Patent Term Adjustment for U.S. national stage applications....more
In In Re Bimeda Research & Development Ltd., the Federal Circuit upheld the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that found that a claim that excluded the presence of a specific compound was not...more
In In re Adler, the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that upheld the Examiner’s determination that the claims at issue were obvious....more
Most of the Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) cases being filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia involve patents issuing from applications in which a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) was...more
In Fresenius, USA Inc. v. Baxter International, Inc., the Federal Circuit interpreted the ex parte reexamination statutes (35 USC §§ 301-307) as providing that the final cancellation of claims in a reexamination proceeding is...more
On June 11, 2013, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued its first final decision in a covered business method patent (CBM) proceeding, in SAP America, Inc. v. Versata Development Group, Inc. (CBM2012-00001)....more
In its third look at the Novo Nordisk A/S patent related to Prandin®, in Novo Nordisk A/S v. Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that claim 4 of U.S. Patent No....more
On June 4, 2013, the White House issued a press release announcing its “Task Force on High-Tech Patent Issues.” The press release outlined five executive actions and seven legislative recommendations “designed to protect...more
6/12/2013
/ Barack Obama ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Non-Practicing Entities ,
Patent Assertion Entities ,
Patent Reform ,
Patent Trolls ,
Patents ,
Proposed Legislation ,
Shell Corporations ,
USPTO
As I wrote previously, Congressman Goodlatte (R-Va.) released “a discussion draft” of patent reform legislation on May 23, 2013....more
As reported on the House Judiciary Committee website, on May 23, 2013, Congressman Goodlatte (R-Va.) released “a discussion draft of legislation designed to address the ever increasing problem of abusive patent litigation.”...more