The Rise of OTAs in Defense Contracting: Opportunities, Risks, and What Contractors Need to Know
Money-Saving Licensing Tips for Startups
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Cease and Desist Letters: Protecting Your Intellectual Property the Right Way
PODCAST: PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Cease and Desist Letters: Protecting Your Intellectual Property the Right Way
A Counterintuitive Approach to Winning Without Litigation: One-on-One with Haley Morrison
SkadBytes Podcast | Tech’s Shifting Landscape: Five Trends Shaping the Conversation
Tips for Conducting a Trade Secret Assessment with Rob Jensen
Will I Get Sued if I Create Another Hospital Drama? — No Infringement Intended Podcast
Essential Steps to Sell Your Business
Mickey Mouse: un ratón con abogado
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
Unexpected Paths to IP Law with Dan Young and Colin White
Why Can't I Clean the Graffiti Off My Walls? — No Infringement Intended Podcast
The Briefing: Trademark Smoked: The Fall of General Cigar’s COHIBA Registration
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - NCAA Name, Image, Likeness (NIL) Update – Effects of House Settlement
How IP Can Fuel Your Startup's Growth
Tariffs and Trade Series: What Senior Management Teams Need to Know
5 Key Takeaways | AI and Your Patent Management, Strategy & Portfolio
Two Key Considerations in NIL Deals
This Federal Circuit opinion analyzes lexicography in the context of claim construction. Alnylam Pharmaceuticals owns U.S. Patent Nos. 11,246,933 (parent) and 11,382,979 (child). These patents relate to biodegradable...more
Coke Morgan Stewart, the acting director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), exercised discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) to deny Tessell’s (“Petitioner’s”) petition in favor of Nutanix (“Patent...more
On the heels of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Acting Director’s recent decision to deny institution of iRhythm Technologies’ inter partes review petition, the PTO has now issued additional decisions clarifying the role...more
In a recent decision, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (“PTAB”) exercised its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) to deny institution of an inter partes review (“IPR”) after applying the Fintiv factors, despite Petitioner’s...more
In a recent patent case, the U.S. government urged a Texas federal court to give greater weight to the difficulty of calculating damages as a basis for finding irreparable harm. If embraced by courts, the move could give...more
A Delegated Rehearing Panel (“DRP”) recently modified the PTAB’s construction of the claim term “workload” and remanded, giving Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“Petitioner”) another opportunity to challenge a processor patent....more
Under a new U.S. Patent and Trademark Office ("USPTO") policy issued in March 2025, pre-institution inter partes review ("IPR") proceedings are now bifurcated, consisting of a first phase in which the director considers...more
When Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart denied institution in Dabico v. AXA Power IPR2025-00408 Paper 21, much of the commentary focused on the result....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 Appeals Board (“PTAB”) recently denied institution of an inter partes review (“IPR”), exercising its discretion under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a)and Apple Inc. v. Fintiv Inc., IPR2020-00019 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2020)...more
The PTAB has published its monthly statistics wrap up for April 2025. As expected, those statistics show a significant decline in the institution rate compared to the first six months of the fiscal year. In those first six...more
On May 16, 2025, USPTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart released the first four discretionary denial decisions under the PTAB’s new process. Under the new process, the parties separately brief discretionary denial issues...more
USPTO Acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart recently vacated and remanded three Final Written Decisions from the PTAB. Semiconductor Components Indus. v. Greenthread, LLC, IPR2023-01242, IPR2023-01243, IPR2023-01244, Paper 94...more
I have previously written extensively on the ongoing legal battle between Nintendo / The Pokémon Company (referred to herein collectively as simply "Nintendo") and PocketPair over PocketPair's popular video game Palworld....more
Insulin Glargine Challenged Claim Types in IPR and Litigation: Claims include those challenged in litigations and IPRs. Claims are counted in each litigation and IPR, so claims from the same patent challenged in multiple...more
In Thermaltake Technology Co., Ltd. et al v. Chien-Hao Chen et al, IPR2024-01230, Paper 12 (PTAB Feb. 19, 2025), the PTAB granted the institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) while an ex parte reexamination (“EPR”) on the...more
Since serving as a Federal Circuit clerk, Michael Hawes has monitored that court's precedential opinions and prepares a deeply outlined index by subject matter (invalidity, infringement, claim construction, etc.) of relevant...more
In re: Riggs, Appeal No. 2022-1945 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 24, 2025) Our Case of the Week explores the power of an examiner to request a rehearing after the Board has entered a decision on an application. The case also relates to...more
A new interim process for the Director to exercise discretion as to whether to institute an inter partes review(IPR) or a post grant review (PGR) was announced on March 26, 2025, in which discretionary considerations and...more
In a precedential opinion issued on March 4, 2025, in Restem, LLC v. Jadi Cell, LLC, No, 23-2054, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s claim construction and ruling that product-by-process...more
In a series of rulings on a motion in limine, the District of Delaware recently distinguished between what qualifies as being incorporated by reference and what does not for the purposes of an anticipation defense. In short,...more
In Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., 127 F.4th 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2025), the Federal Circuit held that patentees in district court are not collaterally estopped from asserting claims that were not immaterially different...more
Back in May of 2020, European patent-licensing company Sisvel filed a flurry of lawsuits against a dozen tech companies who had allegedly infringed Sisvel’s portfolio of wireless communication and networking patents. A...more
Takeaways - - Expired patents may be eligible for reexamination. - Owner’s options during reexamination of an expired patent are severely limited. Similar to reexamination practice, which has long allowed reexamination...more
Apple Inc. v. Gesture Technology Partners, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1475, -1533 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 4, 2025) Our Case of the Week is a high-stakes appeal from an inter partes review concerning a patent titled “Camera Based...more