CQV CO., LTD. v. MERCK PATENT GMBH - Before Cunningham, Chen, and Mayer. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board erred by failing to explain why it discarded material and unrebutted evidence that a reference...more
SIERRA WIRELESS, ULC V. SISVEL S.P.A. Before Moore, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The Board erred by finding method-claim steps connected by “and” to be conditional and by never...more
A patent’s specification established a naming convention that applied to terms in the patent’s claims. Microchip Technology filed an IPR, arguing all claims of HD Silicon Solutions’ patent were invalid. The challenged patent...more
2/14/2025
/ Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
USPTO
Before Dyk, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: An expert witness can testify from the perspective of a POSITA at the time of the invention even if they...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Newman, Bryson, and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Prosecution disclaimer occurred when an applicant explained why claims were amended and the Examiner...more