News & Analysis as of

Patent Applications Patent Litigation

McDermott Will & Emery

Don’t get too comfy: Prosecution disclaimer also applies to design patents

McDermott Will & Emery on

Concluding that the principles of prosecution history disclaimer apply to design patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s denial of judgment as a matter of law and entry of a jury...more

Goodwin

Amgen and Accord BioPharma Settle Denosumab BPCIA Case

Goodwin on

​​​​​​​On July 16, 2025, the District Court for the District of New Jersey entered a Consent Judgment and Injunction in view of a settlement agreement between Amgen, Inc. (“Amgen”) and Accord BioPharma, Inc. (“Accord”)...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Colibri Heart Valve LLC v. Medtronic Corevalve, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2025)

The doctrine of equivalents (DOE), a creation of the Supreme Court in Graver Tank & Mfg. v. Linde Air Products (1950), is balanced by the concept of prosecution history estoppel (PHE), the contours of which were delineated...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Lexicography: Clear And Unequivocal

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

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

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

PTO Creates New Expectations Regarding Discretionary Denials

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

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Is Your Enantiomer Possessed? Patenting of Enantiomers – Does Written Description Require More Than Actual Possession?

It is well established that an enantiomerically pure compound exhibiting advantageous properties not present in its isomer or its corresponding racemic mixture, can be patented even if its corresponding racemic mixtures are...more

DLA Piper

Purdue Appeals Federal Circuit Obviousness Decision to the Supreme Court

DLA Piper on

Purdue Pharma (Purdue) has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari challenging a recent Federal Circuit decision upholding the invalidation of several Purdue patents on grounds of obviousness....more

Jackson Walker

Perceptix v. Meta Platforms – A Headphone Patent Lawsuit Without a Sound Basis

Jackson Walker on

On June 30, 2025, Perceptix filed suit against Meta Platforms for infringement of U.S. Patent 8,498,439, which describes a headphone that turns on when it is worn. The ‘439 Patent is assigned to the Electronics and...more

A&O Shearman

The Federal Circuit Rejects PTAB’s Use Of Traditional Construction Of “Consisting Essentially Of”

A&O Shearman on

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

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Biosimilar Litigations - July 2025

Venable LLP on

Biosimilar Litigations include litigations relating to biosimilar/follow-on products of CDER-listed reference products. Litigations between biosimilar applicants/manufacturers and reference product sponsors as well as...more

Venable LLP

Spotlight On: Lantus® / Lantus® SoloSTAR® (insulin glargine recombinant) / Basaglar® (insulin glargine) / Semglee® (insulin...

Venable LLP on

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

Jones Day

Acting Director Denies IPR Institution Based on “Settled Expectations”

Jones Day on

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

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

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Patent Obviousness in the AI Era

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

The proliferation of artificial intelligence (“AI”) presents complex challenges for intellectual property, especially within patent law. In particular, the obviousness inquiry under 35 U.S.C. § 103 may be susceptible to...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

USPTO Newest Discretionary Denials on Settled Expectations - Best Practices for Petitioners and Patent Owners

Womble Bond Dickinson on

Recently, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a series of discretionary denials of inter partes review (IPR) petitions, based on a new factor, the “settled expectations” of the Patent Owner....more

Troutman Pepper Locke

Patent Litigation Filings May Rise as GDP Falls for First Time in Three Years: Key Insights for Plaintiffs and Defendants

Troutman Pepper Locke on

While there’s no definitive consensus, economists are closely monitoring the possibility of entering a recession this year. Economists agree a recession is not imminent, but caution the odds of facing a recession are higher...more

Fish & Richardson

USPTO: No Bright-Line Rule on When Expectations Become Settled

Fish & Richardson on

On June 18, 2025, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Acting Director Stewart issued a discretionary denial decision in Dabico Airport Solutions Inc. v. AXA Power ApS, granting the patent owner’s request for discretionary denial...more

K&L Gates LLP

First Denial Based on USPTO’s New Discretionary Denial Factors

K&L Gates LLP on

Earlier this year, Chief Judge Boalick issued guidance on the USPTO’s recission of “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” explaining how the Fintiv...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Discretionary Denials in Action: iRhythm Technologies Inc. v. Welch Allyn Inc.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) Acting Director’s recent decision to deny institution of inter partes review (“IPR”) in iRhythm Technologies Inc. v. Welch Allyn Inc. offers valuable lessons for both patent...more

Volpe Koenig

When an IDS Comes Back to Haunt You: Lessons from iRhythm v. Welch Allyn

Volpe Koenig on

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

Lathrop GPM

Claim Construction Matters: Federal Circuit Decision Highlights the Significance of Lexicography in Patent Drafting

Lathrop GPM on

A precedential ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on June 4 affirmed that Moderna’s mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccine SPIKEVAX® does not infringe two patents owned by Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, upholding a...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Priority Denied, Patent Derailed: When One Filing Cancels Out the Other

On April 22, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision In re: Bonnie Iris McDonald Floyd that underscores a critical and often overlooked risk in design patent prosecution: relying on a utility patent application for...more

ArentFox Schiff

Designers Beware: Prior Utility Patent Lacking Written Support Can Anticipate Later-Filed Design Patents

ArentFox Schiff on

In its recent In re Floyd opinion, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a decision by Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to reject a design applicant’s priority claim to an earlier utility filing for...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

755 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 31

"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