Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Wolf Greenfield’s New Shareholders
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Tonia Sayour in the Spotlight
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
Trump v. CASA, Inc., 145 S. Ct. 2540 (2025) In patent cases, successful patent owners can obtain an injunction against an infringer to prevent the infringer from making, using, and selling the infringing product in the...more
Legal updates: case law analysis and intelligence - - The TTAB, applying the Milwaukee test, rejected an application for a dark green colour mark for medical gloves on the ground that it was generic - The Federal Circuit...more
Last month, we provided an overview of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) application of the “settled expectations” doctrine, articulated in recent PTAB director-level decisions. Interim Director Coke Morgan Stewart...more
On July 9, 2025, Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y) found that collateral estoppel barred plaintiff Linfo IP, LLC from relitigating the validity of its asserted patent and dismissed Linfo’s infringement claims against Aero...more
A set of recently issued memoranda by United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) officials has re-energized the debate around discretionary denials in post-grant trials at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”)....more
In a recent article, Haug Partners previewed that the impact of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) new bifurcated approach to discretionary denial requests would depend on how the new Acting USPTO Director, Coke...more
REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION v. ITC - Before Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States International Trade Commission. The Federal Circuit lacks jurisdiction to hear appeals of non-final determinations from...more
DOLBY LABORATORIES LICENSING CORPORATION v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC - Before Moore, Clevenger and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. A patent owner lacks Article III standing to appeal an inter partes review...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
In Realtek Semiconductor Corporation v. ITC (23-1187), the Federal Circuit concluded that it lacked jurisdiction to decide whether the International Trade Commission (ITC) correctly denied Realtek’s motion for sanctions...more
United States Magistrate Judge Figueredo recently denied Plaintiff EscapeX IP, LLC’s (“EscapeX”) efforts to seal its objections to billing records Defendant Google LLC (“Google”) had originally filed under seal in connection...more
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
The Federal Circuit recently clarified in Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel does not extend to physical systems described in prior art patents or printed publications....more
On June 6, 2025, the acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Coke Morgan Stewart, issued a decision in iRhythm Technologies v. Welch Allyn, Inc.1 that initiates a new basis for discretionary denial...more
After assessing whether a patent owner had standing to appeal the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s final written decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found no injury in fact to support Article III...more
In a patent infringement litigation in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Judge Rodney Gilstrap denied a joint motion to stay the litigation pending resolution of inter partes review when it was...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s final determination that challenged patent claims were not unpatentable, finding that the Board’s decision relied on an erroneous...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
The Federal Circuit issued its long-awaited en banc opinion in EcoFactor v. Google, which provides further clarity on the admissibility standards for damages experts under Rule 702. This decision reverses the original panel’s...more
Since Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart took office in 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has overhauled its discretionary denial procedures for inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant reviews (PGRs)....more
On April 16, 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) denied institution of inter partes review (IPR) for several claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,187,307, owned by Universal Connectivity Technologies, Inc. HP Inc., Dell...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed Incyte’s appeal of a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision, holding that a disappointed validity challenger lacked appellate standing to challenge the Board’s final...more
The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) designated a recent Director Review decision as informative, signaling its significance for future proceedings. The decision emphasizes that a final district court ruling invalidating a...more
In what is certain to become a landmark decision, the Federal Circuit has resolved a long-standing question that divided patent litigators and judges alike: does IPR estoppel apply to physical systems (“system art”) described...more
Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2023-1208, -1209 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 23, 2025) - For a second time in this case, the Federal Circuit considered the proper role of “Applicant Admitted Prior Art” in an inter partes...more