Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
The Briefing: A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Podcast: The Briefing - A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
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
Imagine this. You were just served with a Complaint for patent infringement and learn that, some years ago, your competitor was granted a patent giving them a legal monopoly to exclude others, including you, from making,...more
On July 22, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (the “PTAB”) decision not to apply interference estoppel and, therefore, to institute an inter partes review...more
Two recent memoranda from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) have sought to clarify the factors by which boards will evaluate discretionary denial under Fintiv. This guidance follows the U.S. Patent and...more
On January 14, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2023-2346 (Fed. Cir.), affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s ruling that “a published patent...more
In Pfizer Inc., v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., SK Chems Co. Ltd., v. Vidal, 2019-1871 (March 5, 2024), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s conclusions that claims 1–45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 were unpatentable due to...more
Two bills recently introduced in Congress could significantly affect the current patent litigation landscape. The bipartisan bills are titled the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023 and the Promoting and Respecting...more
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
Ex parte reexaminations have re-emerged as an increasingly important component of patent litigation and licensing negotiations. With the passage of the America Invents Act (“AIA”) and the advent of inter partes reviews...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
MOBILITY WORKX, LLC v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC Before Newman, Schall, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Fee-funded structure of AIA review proceedings does not violate due process....more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
[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
The movie Zootopia was hysterically funny because it equated animal stereotypes to what we encounter every day. For example, the best employee at the DMV was named Flash – who was a sloth. Actually, the entire DMV was run by...more
Barry v. Medtronic, Inc. (No. 2017-2463, 1/24/19) (Prost, Moore, Taranto) - Taranto, J. Affirming judgement of no invalidating public use of patents related to methods for correcting spinal column anomalies. Also...more
On October 10, 2018, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced that it will issue a final rule changing the claim construction standard for interpreting claims in inter partes review (IPR), post-grant...more
In a 7-2 opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) procedure created by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”). IPRs allow anyone “who...more
In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the United States Supreme Court held today, in a 7-2 decision, that the inter partes review process under the America Invents Act (AIA), 35 U.S.C. § 100 et...more
On November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case that could undermine a key provision in the America Invents Act. Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC (Oils States). The issue...more
Leading up to the Supreme Court oral argument for Oil States Energy Services, LLC. v. Greene's Energy Group, LLC on November 27, 2017, there was a lot of discussion regarding whether patents were a private or public right. ...more
On November 27, 2017, the Supreme Court considered the question of whether the inter partes review process established by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in implementing portions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act or...more
In a move that could drastically change the patent law landscape, the United States Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC, No. 16-712, to answer the question...more
The Supreme Court has granted a writ of certiorari challenging the constitutionality of inter partes review proceedings conducted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the America Invents Act. The Court’s...more
The Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari to address whether inter partes review – an adversarial process used by the Patent Office to determine the validity of existing patents – is unconstitutional in Oil...more
On June 12, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group, No. 16-712 (U.S. June 12, 2017) granted certiorari to decide next term if certain American Invents Act (AIA) review proceedings,...more