News & Analysis as of

Patent Infringement Patent Applications Patent Invalidity

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

K&L Gates LLP

Let’s Make it a Date–Best Method and the Filing Date of the Earliest Complete Application

K&L Gates LLP on

In the recent decision of NOCO Company v. Brown and Watson International Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 887, Moshinsky J has provided welcomed clarity around the relevant date by which the best method known to the applicant is to be...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Out With the Old, in With the New: Judge Ramos Grants Leave to Assert New Patents After the Original Patents-in-Suit Were Found...

On July 29, 2025, Judge Edgardo Ramos (S.D.N.Y.) granted plaintiff Kannuu Pty, Ltd. (“Kannuu”) leave to amend its complaint to allege infringement of two newly-issued patents, after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office...more

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

Rise of Obviousness Double Patenting SNQs and Rejections in Reexaminations Challenging Expired Patents

Obvious-type double patenting (ODP) has historically served as a tool to prevent patent owners from extending exclusivity beyond the statutory allowed patent term and to tie patent families together during sale. Historically,...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

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

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

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

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

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

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

Amundsen Davis LLC

Preserving Patent Rights: Impact of Public Use on Patenting

Amundsen Davis LLC on

For a business planning to market a product that incorporates an invention, having an enforceable patent to protect the invention is often desirable. Two recent federal circuit cases reiterate what many patent holders and...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | January 2025

Knobbe Martens on

In Honeywell International Inc. v. 3G Licensing, S.A., Appeal No. 23-1354, the Federal Circuit held that under the obviousness standard of 35 U.S.C. § 103, the motivation to modify prior art does not need to be the same as...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

A POSA’s Motivation Is Not Required To Be the Same as the Inventor’s in Evaluating Obviousness

In its first precedential opinion of 2025, Honeywell v. 3G Licensing, No. 2023-1354, the Federal Circuit held that a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA) needs not to have the same motivation as the inventor in an...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2024 #3

Luv N’ Care, Ltd. v. Lindsey Laurain, Appeal Nos. 2022-1905, -1970 (Fed. Cir. Apr.12, 2024) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s bench trial decision that unclean hands...more

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

2022 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more

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

[Webinar] 2022 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis and Trends - February 28th, 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EST

Speakers will offer updates, case summaries, and analysis of the significant 2022 PTAB guidance, actions, and rulings. Topics include: the Director’s 2022 Fintiv guidance, PTAB discretionary denial, the use of applicant...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

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

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

[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

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

2021 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends

This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more

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

[Webinar] Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions - February 17th, 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EST

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox invites you to a webinar, "Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions," on Thursday, February 17, 2022. In conjunction with the release of the firm's...more

Procopio, Cory, Hargreaves & Savitch LLP

The Continued Impact on Patent Prosecutors and Litigators of the Federal Circuit’s Expanded Treatment of Means Plus Function...

In a new precedential Federal Circuit decision, Kyocera Senco Industrial Tools Inc. v. ITC, that impacts both patent prosecutors and litigators, the court again demonstrated the reach of its recent expansion of language that...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Admission in Specification Dooms Organ Transplant Patents Under § 101

The United States District Court for the District of Delaware recently held that claims covering methods for evaluating organ transplant rejection are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The patents at issue disclose methods...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2020 Decisions

[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2019

Knobbe Martens on

The Appointments Clause: Ensuring That PTAB Decisions Are Subject to Constitutional Checks and Balances  In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2251, the Federal Circuit ruled that, under the then-existing...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2019

Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB Cannot Approve or Deny Certificates of Correction - In Honeywell International, Inc. v. Arkema Inc., Arkema France, Appeal Nos. 2018-1151, -1153, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) does not have the...more

Quinn Emanuel

July 2019: Understanding the Unique Features of China’s Rapidly Expanding Patent System

Quinn Emanuel on

China is probably now the third most important (after the United States and Germany) venue for patent prosecution and enforcement, and it is critical for companies doing business there to understand how the system works....more

37 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