News & Analysis as of

CAFC Prior Art Patent Infringement

Morgan Lewis

A New Line Drawn: Federal Circuit Applies Prosecution History Disclaimer to Design Patents

Morgan Lewis on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a decision that held for the first time that principles of prosecution history disclaimer apply to design patents, aligning design patent law more closely with...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Enabling Anticipatory Prior Art Reference Need Only Enable a Single Embodiment of the Claim

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MODERNA, INC. [OPINION] (2023-2357, 06/04/2025) (Taranto, Chen, Hughes) - Taranto, J. The Court affirmed the district court’s claim...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit: Plans for Future Activity Created a Substantial Risk of Future Infringement

Jones Day on

Restem filed a petition for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,803,176, directed to stem cells obtained from umbilical cord tissue and isolated through a two-step process to create a specific cell marker expression...more

ArentFox Schiff

Federal Circuit Sinks Appeal Over Design Patent Claiming Well-Known Pool Features

ArentFox Schiff on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a summary judgment of no design patent infringement in North Star Tech. Int’l Ltd. v. Latham Pool Products, Inc., ruling that the patented and accused pool...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit: Petitioner Estoppel Does Not Apply to Product Prior At Grounds

Jones Day on

In IOENGINE, LLC v. Ingenico Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit narrowed the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), which precludes an IPR petitioner from asserting in court that a patent claim “is invalid...more

A&O Shearman

The CAFC Holds That IPR Estoppel Does Not Shield Patentees From System Prior Art

A&O Shearman on

On May 7, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) affirmed a decision by the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (“district court”) that found claims of two IOENGINE, LLC (“IOENGINE”)...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

R.I.P. Mr. Rosen: Federal Circuit Upends Longstanding Design Patent Obviousness Test

Quarles & Brady LLP on

Upending decades of continuity in the world of design patents, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”), sitting en banc in LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, overturned the...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Design Patent Obviousness Inquiry Is Up for Review at the CAFC

Quarles & Brady LLP on

As we have previously written about, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) has granted a petition for an en banc rehearing of LKQ Corp. et al v. GM Global Technology to rule on the...more

Jones Day

Another Bite? CAFC Allows Expansion of Arguments in Reply

Jones Day on

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit found no abuse of discretion by the Board when it allowed Apple to expand its analogous art contention in its IPR reply, finding that the Board’s decision did not run afoul of the...more

Irwin IP LLP

CAFC Holds Priority Favors True Trailblazers, Not Maze-Like Paths Through a Forest of Prior Applications: Regents of the...

Irwin IP LLP on

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) recently upheld a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) that found some claims of U.S. Patent 8,815,830 (“the ’830 patent”) unpatentable as anticipated....more

Jones Day

CAFC Holds Applicant Admitted Prior Art Cannot be the Basis of an IPR Ground

Jones Day on

Section 311(b) limits inter partes review to “ground[s] that could be raised under section 102 or 103 and only on the basis of prior art consisting of patents or printed publications.” 35 U.S.C. § 311(b) (emphasis added). An...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - April 2021

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - ..WI-LAN INC. v. SHARP ELECTRONICS CORPORATION [OPINION]  (2020-1041, April 6, 2021) (DYK, TARANTO, and STOLL) - Dyk, J.  Affirming related district court judgments holding...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

CAFC Finds Publication Did Not Inherently Disclose Aveed Composition

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Endo Pharmaceuticals Solutions, Inc. v. Custopharm Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that two patents listed in the Orange Book for Aveed® had not been shown to be obvious. Although prior art...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

CAFC Affirms Finacea Gel Infringement Under Doctrine of Equivalents

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Intendis GmbH v. Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Inc., USA, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court decision that found infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. This case shows that the doctrine of equivalents...more

14 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