News & Analysis as of

Patent Applications CAFC

Foley & Lardner LLP

Federal Circuit Skeptical of Prosecution Laches

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Google v. Sonos, the Federal Circuit soundly disposed of arguments that the patent-in-suit was unenforceable due to laches based on an “unreasonable delay” in patent prosecution. Does the court’s reasoning foreclose the...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

Federal Circuit Pushes Back on Prosecution Laches

In October 2023, we reported on the district court decision in Sonos, Inc. v. Google LLC. The decision was notable for reviving the prosecution laches doctrine to render unenforceable a continuation patent filed 13 years...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

The Federal Circuit Calls for a Replay Allowing Sonos Another Opportunity at Google

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc. (24-1097) offers a compelling look at the evolving doctrine of prosecution laches, the written description requirement, and the practical realities of patent...more

Miller Canfield

Patent Derivation Proceedings Offer a First-to-File Exception - Don’t Take the Bait

Miller Canfield on

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Global Health Solutions LLC v. Selner is its first review of a rare patent dispute resolution process under the America Invents Act (AIA). The decision serves as a warning that proving...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Issues First Decision on Litigated AIA Derivation Proceeding

In Global Health Solutions LLC v. Selner, the Federal Circuit addressed for the first time an appeal from a derivation proceeding litigated before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under the America Invents Act (AIA)....more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re BAC IP B.V. (Fed. Cir. 2025)

A patent applicant dissatisfied by an patent examiner's rejection of that applicant's claims in ex parte prosecution has recourse by appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under 35 U.S.C. § 134, and to the Federal...more

Irwin IP LLP

Arguments in Prosecution History Limit Design Patents Too 

Irwin IP LLP on

The USPTO must reject a patent application if the applicant’s claim covers what the prior art already disclosed, and patent applicants may respond to such rejections with arguments that what they claimed was different. ...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

Azurity Pharms., Inc. v. Alkem Labs. Ltd.

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The ’948 patent claims non-sterile drinkable liquid formulations of vancomycin, an antibiotic used to treat Clostridium difficile infection. These formulations are particularly...more

Cooley LLP

Federal Circuit Strengthens Prosecution History Estoppel Principles in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC

Cooley LLP on

On July 18, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a lower court ruling in Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic CoreValve, LLC, holding that prosecution history estoppel barred the patentees’ doctrine...more

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

MoFo Life Sciences

A Tip for Improving Your “Improved” Jepson Claim: Include Written Description Support

MoFo Life Sciences on

The Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in In re: Xencor, Inc.concerning written support for Jepson claims. The decision affirms the decision of the Appeals Review Panel (ARP) of the USPTO, which held that the...more

DLA Piper

What is a “Clear and Unmistakable” Prosecution History Disclaimer?

DLA Piper on

The Federal Circuit’s March 21, 2025 decision in Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc. et al. (No. 2023-2045) and the recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Delegated Rehearing Panel decision in SynAffix B.V. v....more

A&O Shearman

Court Of Appeals For The Federal Circuit Holds That Conception Does Not Require Certainty of Success

A&O Shearman on

On May 12, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated-in-part and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision in an interference proceeding concluding that the Broad Institute, Inc. (“Broad...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Take That Conception Out of the Oven – It’s CRISPR Even If the Cook Doesn’t Know

Addressing the distinction between conception and reduction to practice and the requirement for written description in the unpredictable arts, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that proof of conception...more

Downs Rachlin Martin PLLC

One Year of LKQ v. GM: How Much Has Really Changed?

One year ago today, the en banc Federal Circuit decided LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, where it overturned the decades-old Rosen-Durling test for obviousness of a design patent for being “improperly...more

Bracewell LLP

Recentive v. Fox: Machine-Learning Claims Fail to Make the Grade

Bracewell LLP on

The patent eligibility of claims involving the use of machine learning (ML) was recently considered by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., Case No. 2023-2437 (Fed....more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Reaffirms “Carried Forward” Requirement for Provisional Priority in Reexams and Reissues

Requesters should make sure to double cite to non-provisional and provisional if they require a provisional filing date for prior art....more

Morgan Lewis

Priority Catch-22: Federal Circuit Chills Design Patent with Rejection of Priority Claim

Morgan Lewis on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a decision that highlights a risk in design patent prosecution—specifically, attempting to claim priority to a utility application. In re Floyd, the Federal...more

Lathrop GPM

Federal Circuit Holds Machine Learning Patent Claims That Don’t Improve the Technology Are Patent Ineligible

Lathrop GPM on

On April 18, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) decided a case of first impression regarding the intersection of patent claims directed to machine learning training and patentable subject matter...more

Goodwin

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s In Re Riggs Decision: 35 USC 102(e) Prior Art Requires Written Description Support...

Goodwin on

On March 24, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Riggs (the Riggs decision) that vacated a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the US...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Clarifies Requirements For A Prior Art Reference’s Entitlement To The Filing Date Of A Provisional Application To...

A&O Shearman on

On March 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued an opinion vacating and remanding a decision of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) that a published patent application...more

Quarles & Brady LLP

Recap of 2024 U.S. Design Patent Drama: Here’s What We Know Now

Quarles & Brady LLP on

In 2024, design patent law encountered a couple of major changes: the implementation of a new design patent bar, and the upending of decades of obviousness law under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the en banc United States Court...more

Baker Donelson

A Baker's Dozen of Patent Law Developments for 2024

Baker Donelson on

The world of intellectual property law is always changing, and it can be difficult to keep up. Here are 13 developments in patent law so far in 2024 to help you stay in the know....more

Amundsen Davis LLC

For Sale or Not for Sale? Consider a Patent Application First

Amundsen Davis LLC on

For sale, or not for sale- That is the question in Larry G. Junker v. Medical Components Inc. et al., case that started in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and which has now been appealed to...more

International Lawyers Network

Can Design Patents Be Limiting in Enforcement?

Suppose that you have an invention disclosure for a design of an article that you want to protect?  When you review the invention disclosure, you notice that the design is ornamental, for example a pattern, on an article such...more

27 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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