Before Lourie, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claim limitations requiring communications to be “encrypted” or to deliver “program code” were not subject to the printed matter...more
ALARM.COM INC. v. HIRSHFELD -
Before Taranto, Chen, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.
Summary: The Administrative Procedure Act (APA) permits judicial...more
INDIVIOR UK LIMITED v. DR. REDDY'S LABORATORIES S.A.
Before Lourie, Linn, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Claims of a continuation application were anticipated because they were not...more
SEABED GEOSOLUTIONS (US) INC. v. MAGSEIS FF LLC.
Before Moore, Linn, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Where a claim term’s meaning is clear from the intrinsic evidence, no extrinsic evidence...more
Before the United States Supreme Court. Majority opinion by Chief Justice Roberts. On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Summary: A statute preventing the PTO Director from...more
6/25/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
NEW VISION GAMING & DEVELOPMENT, INC. V. SG GAMING, INC.
Before Newman, Moore, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded two CBM decisions under...more
SYNQOR, INC. v. VICOR CORPORATION -
Before Dyk, Clevenger, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A finding during inter partes reexamination that two references would not be combined...more
EGENERA, INC. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC.
Before Prost, Stoll, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts.
Summary: A patentee that successfully petitioned to correct a patent’s...more
9/2/2020
/ Claim Construction ,
Denial of Institution ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Estoppel ,
Means-Plus-Function ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand
UNILOC 2017 LLC v. HULU, LLC -
Before O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. O’Malley dissenting. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: The Board did not exceed its statutory authority in an inter partes...more
B/E AEROSPACE, INC. v. C&D ZODIAC, INC.
Before Lourie, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Common sense may be invoked in obviousness determination if accompanied by reasoned...more
SHOES BY FIREBUG LLC v. STRIDE RITE CHILDREN'S GROUP -
Before Lourie, Moore, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: In similar claims of two related patents, one preamble was limiting...more
ADIDAS AG v. NIKE, INC.
Before Moore, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A patent challenger can establish standing to appeal a final written decision in an IPR by showing that...more
Summary: When administrative patent judges are unconstitutionally appointed, their decisions in appeals from inter partes reexamination must be vacated, just like their decisions in inter partes review.
Appellee Cisco and...more
The Decision. On April 20, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to institute inter partes review (IPR) are not appealable, even if such institution decisions may...more
4/24/2020
/ § 314(d) ,
§ 315(b) ,
§314(a) ,
§314(b) ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Dissenting Opinions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Judicial Review ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Thryv Inc v Click-To-Call Technologies LP ,
Time-Barred Claims ,
Vacated
FACEBOOK, INC., V. WINDY CITY INNOVATIONS LLC -
Before Prost, Plager, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: An IPR petitioner may not join itself to an earlier IPR in which it was already a...more
LIQWD, INC. v. L'OREAL USA, INC.
Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll.
Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Evidence of copying was relevant to nonobviousness even though the copied feature came from...more
11/2/2019
/ Appeals ,
Disclosure ,
Non-Disclosure Agreement ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Remand ,
Vacated
IN RE: GLOBAL IP HOLDINGS LLC -
Before Moore, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Written description support for a claimed genus depends on the criticality or importance of the...more
BTG INTERNATIONAL LIMITED v. AMNEAL PHARMACEUTICALS LLC -
Before Wallach, Moore, and Chen. Consolidated appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the U.S. District Court for the District of New...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Newman, Dyk, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: An injury-in-fact is required to establish Article III standing for judicial review of agency action,...more
2/12/2019
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
Biosimilars ,
Clinical Trials ,
Estoppel ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Mootness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Standing
Over the last year, several Federal Circuit judges have filed opinions lamenting the state of the case law that interprets the abstract idea exception to patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. For example, Judge Linn...more
Patent enforcement by Texas-based DataTreasury Corp. (“DataTreasury”) was a key motivation for the creation of Covered Business Method Review (“CBM”) proceedings. Senator Charles Schumer of New York, referring to...more
5/3/2017
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Admissible Evidence ,
America Invents Act ,
Claim Limitations ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Denial of Certiorari ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Young Lawyers