Latest Posts › Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Share:

The Federal Circuit Clarifies the Meaning of “Publicly Disclosed”

This decision emphasizes the significance of broader public dissemination to meet the statutory requirement of “publicly disclosed” for purposes of exceptions to prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)(2)(B)....more

The Federal Circuit Interprets the Application of 35 USC § 285 and Attorney’s Fees

In Dragon Intellectual Property LLC v. Dish Network L.L.C. No. 22-1621 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2024), the Federal Circuit clarifies the standard for “exceptional” cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The case concerns attorneys’ fees and...more

Federal Circuit Rebukes Attempt to Incorporate Arguments by Reference to a Related IPR Petition

In Medronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Life Sciences Limited, 2022-1721, 2022-1722 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 16, 2023), the Federal Circuit considered whether U.S. Patent RE46,116 (“the ’116 patent”) was entitled to an alleged priority date...more

Axonics v. Medtronic

The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded two Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decisions because the PTAB erred in its obviousness analysis and found that Axonics failed to show a motivation to combine as to Medtronic’s...more

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschlan GMBH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.

The Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) decision finding the challenged claims of Sanofi-Aventis’ ’614 patent unpatentable as obvious....more

6 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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