Herb Stapleton's FBI Experience Proves to be Asset to Dinsmore's Corporate Team
Former FBI Executive and Cybersecurity Leader Herbert Stapleton Joins Dinsmore’s National Corporate Practice
No Password Required: Former Lead Attorney at U.S. Cyber Command, Cyber Law Strategist, and Appreciator of ‘Mad Men’ Hats
A Counterintuitive Approach to Winning Without Litigation: One-on-One with Haley Morrison
Lawyers Beware: There Could Be Serious Ethics Issues With The New AI Browsers
LathamTECH in Focus: Tech Deals: The Emerging Focus of FDI Regulators?
Fox on Podcasting: Harnessing the Power of Niche
Navigating Employee Integration in Mergers and Acquisitions: Lessons From Pretty Woman — Hiring to Firing Podcast
FCPA Compliance Report: Stay the Course: Ellen Lafferty on Navigating Anti-Corruption Compliance in 2025
Multijurisdictional Employers, P2: 2025 State-by-State Updates on Non-Compete/Non-Solicitation Agts
6 Takeaways | From Tension to Teamwork: Real Strategies for Legal Collaboration
Hsu Untied interview with David Cohen, General Counsel at Infinite Athlete
Hsu Untied interview with Brad Waugh, General Counsel at TP-Link
Compliance Tip of the Day – New FCPA Enforcement Memo – What Does it Mean?
Hsu Untied interview with D'Lonra Ellis, CLO of Oakland A's
Your Guide to Dealing with Subpoenas Effectively
Episode 371 -- DOJ's New Corporate Enforcement Program
Shout Outs and Rants: Episode 153, The CW 25 Edition
Regulatory Ramblings: Episode 68 - Why Geopolitical Risk Matters to Compliance and Legal Staff with Mark Nuttal and Chad Olsen
Innovation in Compliance: Strategic Compliance in Regulated Industries with Kerri Reuter
On July 31, 2025, Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart released a memo instructing the agency “that applicant admitted prior art (AAPA), expert testimony, common sense, and other evidence that is not ‘prior art...more
The Patent Office recently announced that it will begin enforcing a rule that requires that inter partes review (IPR) petitions “specify where each element of the claim is found in the prior art patents or printed...more
On July 31, the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a memorandum (“Memo”) announcing that the Office will renew enforcement of 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(4) (“Rule 104(b)(4)”) in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings....more
On June 30, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a decision by the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) and remanded the case for further proceedings using a narrower construction of the...more
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
On June 11, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision invalidating two patents owned by Agilent Technologies. The patents at issue, U.S. Patent...more
Patent attorneys are well-versed in the function of the Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) during prosecution. We understand that listing prior art in an IDS satisfies the duty of candor, helps insulate patents from...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) continues to play a pivotal role in shaping the intellectual property landscape. In 2024, several developments affecting PTAB practice emerged, from new rulemaking at the USPTO to key...more
In ZyXEL, the petitioner unexpectedly received a second chance to argue against the patentability of the patentee’s substitute claims, even though the U.S. Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) had already found those claims...more
Changes to design patent validity law may be coming thanks to LKQ v. GM, a case that we’ve been tracking since April 2021. On February 5, 2024, in a rare en banc hearing, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit asked...more
On February 8, in Weber, Inc. v. Provisur Technologies, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and held that Weber’s operating manuals are prior art printed publications despite their...more
Last week, in a precedential decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) clarified the law on comparison prior art in design patent cases. In the decision, captioned Columbia Sportswear...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent precedential decision in Parus Holdings v. Google underscores the importance of complying with the PTAB’s procedural rules in an IPR and the potentially serious consequences of not doing so. The...more
In a precedential opinion issued last month, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) held that when the single issue presented on appeal is whether a prior art reference teaches a particular claim...more
On March 6, in Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in an inter partes review (IPR) invalidating claims of the...more
In LG Electronics v. Immervision, the Federal Circuit clarified the standard for evaluating whether a prior art reference includes an obvious typographical error. See 39 F.4th 1364, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2022). Under this...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...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
The Federal Circuit has recently provided substantial guidance on whether printed publications include documents publicly available via the internet. This article reviews four such cases that illustrate the expansive view...more
On December 28, in Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may not decline to consider the patentability of a claim challenged in an inter partes review (IPR)...more
In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Corcept Therapeutics, Inc.,1 the Federal Circuit affirmed the obviousness analysis performed by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), which found that Corcept’s patent for methods of...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent decision on an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to limit prior art for design patent applications to only analogous fields may make it easier for...more
In the recent precedential Federal Circuit decision Valve Corporation v. Ironburg Inventions Ltd., No. 2020-1315, 2020-1315, 2020-1379, 2021 WL 3628664 (Fed. Cir. August 17, 2021), the Federal Circuit ruled on an issue that...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Microsoft Corporation v. FG SRC, LLC, No. 2020-1928 (Fed. Cir. June 17, 2021), is a stark reminder that an IPR petitioner must always set forth its grounds in its petition with...more
As of 2020, post grant proceedings have been in use for eight years. Designed as an alternative to district court litigation post grant proceedings have offered litigants a faster and more cost effective forum for resolving...more