Latest Posts › Appeals

Share:

Unforced Error: An IPR Challenger Cannot Rely on an Error That a Posita Would Have Corrected

LG ELECTRONICS INC. v. IMMERVISION INC. Before Stoll, Cunningham, and Newman, Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Where a reference contains an “obvious”...more

The Heightened Standard of Proving Induced Infringement

ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION v. MESO SCALE DIAGNOSTICS, LLC - Before Newman, Prost, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A finding of inducing infringement requires...more

No Standing for Second Bite at the Apple

APPLE, INC. v. QUALCOMM, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Apple lacked standing to appeal an IPR decision upholding patents that Apple licenses from...more

When Can the PTO Extend a Patent’s Term Due to Delay From an Appeal?

CHUDIK V. HIRSHFELD - Before Taranto, Bryson, and Hughes. Appeal from the United State District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia - Summary: An examiner’s self-reversal may not qualify as “reversing an...more

It’s a Date – Twitter Reply Proves Prior Art Publication Date

VIDSTREAM LLC V. TWITTER, INC. Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Evidence of a prior art reference’s publication date submitted after an IPR petition may be...more

Natural Law and Nothing More

AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING v. NEAPCO HOLDINGS LLC - Before Dyk, Moore, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Claims directed to a law of nature, without more, may not be...more

PTAB Must Evidence Decision Path During IPR Proceedings

ALACRITECH, INC. V. INTEL CORP., CAVIUM, LLC, DELL, INC. Before Stoll, Chen, and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTAB’s obviousness determination must meet the Administrative Procedure...more

Improvements to Operation of an Apparatus Were Not Abstract

XY, LLC v. TRANS OVA GENETICS, LC - Before Wallach, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Summary: Claims directed to improving a method of operating an apparatus...more

The Definition of “Half-Liquid” Is Only Half Baked

IBSA INSTITUT BIOCHIMIQUE, S.A. V. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware - Summary: A term may be indefinite when the proposed construction is not...more

Preliminary Injunction Denied Because of Failure to Draft Precise Terms That Capture the Intent of the Parties

TAKEDA PHARMACEUTICALS U.S.A., INC. V. MYLAN PHARMACEUTICALS INC. Before Prost, Newman, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware - Summary: The scope of a contract term may...more

Intrinsic Evidence Establishing the Context of a Claim Term Can Limit Claim Scope

MCRO, INC. v. BANDAI NAMCO GAMES AMERICA - Before Reyna, Mayer and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: The scope of a claim term may be limited when...more

Non-Prior Art Evidence May Be Used to Prove Inherency

HOSPIRA, INC. V. FRESENIUS KABI USA, LLC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Moore.  Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Summary:  Evidence of the properties of claimed embodiments may be...more

Specification’s Narrow Description of the Invention Results in Disavowal of Claim Scope

TECHTRONIC INDUSTRIES CO. LTD. v. ITC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Wallach. Appeal from the U.S. International Trade Commission. Summary: Consistent description in the specification of a particular embodiment as the...more

Publication Shelved in Publicly Accessible Library Was Accessible to the Public and Therefore Available as Prior Art

TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v. TCL CORPORATION - Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and CLEVENGER. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary:  Publications shelved in publicly accessible libraries may be publicly...more

Costs Awarded to Defendant After Case Dismissed for Mootness

B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C. v. FACEBOOK, INC. Before Lourie, Plager, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. Summary: A decision on the merits is not a prerequisite...more

Federal Court Lacked Jurisdiction over Contract Dispute Implicating Patent Infringement

INSPIRED DEVELOPMENT GROUP v. INSPIRED PRODUCTS GROUP, LLC - Before Prost, Newman, and Stoll.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Summary: Alleging that a contract issue...more

An Improper Reply to a Final Office Action May Result in the Accrual of Applicant Delay for PTA Calculations

INTRA-CELLULAR THERAPIES, INC v. IANCU - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary:  If a proper reply to a final Office Action is not...more

A “Substantially Equivalent” Disclosure May Satisfy the Written Description Requirement

NALPROPION PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ACTAVIS LABORATORIES FL, INC. Before Prost, Lourie and Wallach. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A “substantially equivalent” disclosure may...more

The Doctrine of Equivalents May Apply Despite Restriction Requirements and Narrow Claiming

UCB, INC. v. WATSON LABORATORIES INC. Before Taranto, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Application of the doctrine of equivalents may not be barred...more

VersaTop Support Systems v. Georgia Expo, Inc.

Before Newman, Linn, and Dyk. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Summary: The Trademark Act’s definition of “use in commerce” as a requirement for obtaining a federal trademark does...more

Grunenthal GMBH v. Alkem Laboratories Limited

Before Judges Reyna, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: There may be no reasonable expectation of success in producing a specific polymorph of a compound when...more

ENDO Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. TEVA Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

Before Wallach, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Claims directed to a specific method of treatment for specific patients using a specific compound...more

Chargepoint, Inc. v. Semaconnect, Inc.

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. Summary: An abstract idea cannot be used to supply an inventive concept that renders a claim...more

Dr. Falk Pharma GmbH v. Generico, LLC

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Lourie, O’Malley, Reyna. Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, and United States District Court for the...more

Duncan Parking Technologies v. IPS Group, Inc.

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Lourie, Dyk and Taranto. Consolidated Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the Southern District of California. Summary: A person is a joint inventor of the anticipating...more

45 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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