Daily Compliance News: April 24, 2025, The Made in Malaysia Edition
Crashing and Burning: What Companies Can Learn From the Apple TV+ Series WeCrashed - Hiring to Firing Podcast
Is the Patent Litigation Boom Coming to an End?
Apple Loses First 'Big' Case to MobileMedia, Lawyer Says
The Federal Circuit recently reversed a PTAB determination on remand that a patent was obvious over applicant admitted prior art (“AAPA”) in combination with prior art patents, holding that expressly designating AAPA as a...more
In May 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) panel in Apple Inc. v. Fintiv, Inc. (IPR2020-00019) denied institution of Apple’s petition in view of the advanced state of a parallel district court litigation and in...more
The U.S. Patent and Trade Office (PTO) on February 28, 2025, rescinded former PTO Director Kathi Vidal's June 21, 2022, memorandum (Memorandum) addressing discretionary denial of inter partes review (IPR) of patents that are...more
On February 24, 2025 the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced that David Gooder would step down from his role as Commissioner for Trademarks at the end of the month....more
On February 28, 2025, the USPTO issued a Notice rescinding a Memorandum issued by former Director Kathy Vidal, which, since June 21, 2022, had defined USPTO guidance regarding whether to discretionarily deny a post-grant...more
On February 28, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office announced that it has rescinded the June 21, 2022, memorandum about discretionary denials in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) post-grant proceedings with...more
Before Lourie, Dyk, and Hughes. Appeals from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Summary: The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has jurisdiction over IPRs concerning expired patents because the review of such patents...more
The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in SoftView LLC v. Apple Inc. clarifying the scope of patent owner estoppel set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.73(d)(3)(i). 2024 WL 3543902 (Fed. Cir. July 26, 2024). The regulation...more
A trio of cases this past year illustrate a trend of increasing importance in the power of Patent-Office rulemaking and enforcement, and the influence it has on patent owners and challengers alike....more
In Apple Inc. v. DoDots Licensing Sols. LLC, IPR2023-00939, Paper 12 (PTAB Jan. 3, 2024) (“Decision”), the PTAB clarified what is and what is not part of the prior art, and as such what can be considered by the PTAB in an IPR...more
BERTINI v. APPLE INC. Before Moore, Taranto and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Tacking a mark for one good or service does not grant priority for every other good or service in the...more
APPLE INC. v. VIDAL - Before Lourie, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Judicial review is available to determine whether the PTO...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
Earlier today, USPTO Director Kathi Vidal issued interim guidance regarding the application of the factors the PTAB considers in determining whether to institute an AIA post-grant proceeding where there is parallel district...more
On February 1, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit held that Apple could not base an inter partes review (IPR) challenge of a Qualcomm patent solely on “applicant admitted prior art” (AAPA) found in the patent...more
On the first of February, in Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) on two inter partes review (“IPR”)...more
On January 18, the Supreme Court denied petitions for writs of certiorari from both Apple and Mylan Laboratories. Each company sought to challenge the NHK/Fintiv framework that was developed by the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
On Nov. 10, 2021, the Northern District of California granted the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) motion to dismiss a lawsuit brought by Apple and co-plaintiffs challenging the Patent Trial and Appeal...more
On Oct. 28, 2021, the Solicitor General filed a brief in opposition to Apple’s petition for a writ of certiorari in Apple Inc. v. Optis Cellular Tech., LLC et al. (No. 21-118). The government argued that the Federal Circuit...more
This issue of The PTAB Review begins with a brief summary of the U.S. Supreme Court’s most recent pronouncement about America Invents Act (AIA) reviews. It then provides an update on the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s...more
On March 9, 2021, the Federal Circuit affirmed several inter partes review (IPR) decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) related to the estoppel provision 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1). Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Facebook Inc....more
In a consolidated appeal from the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Apple, Inc. challenged the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“Board”) determination that Voip-Pal.com, Inc.’s patents were not obvious over the prior...more
Last week, four major technology companies – Apple, Cisco, Google, and Intel – brought suit against the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), challenging its authority to reject petitions for inter...more
Apple filed two petitions for inter partes review (IPR) against DSS's U.S. Patent No. 6,128,290. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office instituted the IPRs and issued final written...more
In a recent decision, Judge Schroeder of the Eastern District of Texas rejected the argument that decisions of the United State Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) invalidating patents held infringed by a jury means that a...more