In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in a case captioned Perdiemco, LLC. v. Industrack LLC, the Court found some patents having method claims directed to "conveying user location" to be...more
Bruce Zak, an individual, sued Facebook, Inc. for patent infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on two of his software patents -- United States Patent Nos. 8,713,134 and 9,141,720. ...more
Sally Beauty (Petitioner) filed a Petition requesting a review under the transitional program for covered business method (CBM) patents of U.S. Patent No. 5,969,324, owned by Intellectual Ventures I LLC (IV)....more
On March 10, 2016, Silver Star Capital, LLC filed a petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,212,079 (IPR2016-00736). The patent owner is Power Integrations, Inc. On its face, this seems like another IPR filed...more
Pre-AIA and Post-AIA Issues Presented by the On-Sale Bar -
The “on-sale” bar to patentability refers to a sale or offer for sale of an invention that can invalidate the patent for that invention. The...more
6/7/2016
/ aBLA ,
Amended Regulation ,
America Invents Act ,
Amgen ,
Apotex ,
Appeals ,
Biosimilars ,
BPCIA ,
Commercial Marketing ,
Community Trademark ,
Declaratory Judgments ,
EU ,
Filing Fees ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Generic Drugs ,
Inventions ,
Notice Requirements ,
On-Sale Bar ,
Patent Dance ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Patents ,
Popular ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Prior Art ,
Public Use ,
Renewal Fees ,
Sandoz ,
Sandoz v Amgen ,
Trademark Registration ,
Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) ,
USPTO
The “on-sale” bar to patentability refers to a sale or offer for sale of an invention that can invalidate the patent for that invention. The America-Invents-Act (AIA), which altered the language in the statutes that apply to...more
Directory Assistance Call Completion Is Not A Financial Service for CBM Purposes -
On May 4, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution of a Covered Business Method (CBM)...more
Pepys (17th century) recorded his sleep patterns, so wearable devices that record sleep patterns unpatentable?
On April 27, 2016, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issued an Order indicating that two patents...more
Focusing on the Claims, the PTAB Denies CBM Review of a Market Research Patent -
On April 13, 2016, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution...more
U.S. Patent to Database for Protecting Formula for Coca-Cola Found Invalid under CBM Review -
On March 2, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in the Covered Business...more
PTAB Ignores District Court Claim Construction, Finds Patent Invalid -
On February 19, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in the Covered Business Method (CBM) patent...more
3/18/2016
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Claim Construction ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Motion to Amend ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
SCOTUS
Laches Bars Claim to Change Inventorship on Issued U.S. Patent -
On February 16, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in a case captioned Hedwig Lismont v. Alexander Binzel Corp. This appeal arises from an...more
Despite Amendments during Reexamination, Intervening Rights Not Found -
On February 10, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in a case captioned Convolve, Inc., and Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. Compaq...more
On February 10, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued a nonprecedential opinion in a case captioned Driessen v. Sony Music Entertainment, Best Buy Stores, Fye, & Target Corp. addressing issues related to means-plus-function claims...more
On January 29, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an Opinion in Avid Technology, Inc. v. Harmonic, Inc. in which the judgment of the District Court was vacated, and the case was remanded for a new trial on infringement. Avid...more
Coupon Patent Easily Found Invalid under § 101 -
On January 12, 2016, the District Court for the District of Delaware issued an opinion in a case captioned Motivation Innovations, LLC v. Petsmart, Inc. Plaintiff,...more
Business Method Patent Survives PTAB Review -
On January 22, 2016, the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution of a covered business method (CBM) patent review in a case captioned...more
Financial Services Patent Claims Invalid -
On January 20, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in the case captioned Mortgage Grader, Inc. v. First Choice Loan Services Inc., NYLX, Inc. This case involves patent...more
Generic Software Claims Found Ineligible under § 101 -
A common theme found in recent patent litigation is that software claims lacking detail are more likely to be found invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The U.S....more
Two recent District Court decisions show examples of "weak" claims, which in the past would likely be found invalid as lacking novelty or being obvious, but today are struck down as being unpatentable under § 101. The cases...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has likely seen an increase in the number of appealed rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 due to the Supreme Court's decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v....more
Thomas Steed, Sourav Bhattacharya, and Sandeep Seshadrijois (collectively "Steed") filed a patent application entitled "Web-Integrated On-Line Financial Database System and Method for Debt Recovery," on April 6, 2004, with...more
10/6/2015
/ Due Diligence ,
Due Process ,
Evidence ,
Inventors ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Pro Se Litigants ,
Reduction to Practice ,
USPTO ,
Waivers
Traditional patent law holds that a patentee of a patent that survives reexamination is only entitled to infringement damages for the time period between the date of issuance of the original claims and the date of issuance of...more
9/22/2015
/ Claim Construction ,
Damages ,
Ex Partes Reexamination ,
Patent Amendments ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm ,
Scope of the Claim ,
USPTO
In Media Rights Technologies, Inc. v. Capital One Financial Corp. (September 4, 2015), the Federal Circuit first transformed a broadly described element in a claim into a means-plus-function claim term, and then found the...more
In Inline Plastics Corp. v. EasyPak, LLC, the Federal Circuit offered some bits of wisdom for patent application specification drafting, while applying well-known case law to conclude that claims are not limited to a specific...more