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?
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
On June 13, 2022, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion that vacated the district court’s judgment of indefiniteness, deciding that the ruling was based on an erroneous claim construction. The patents-in-suit...more
Last week was argument week at the Federal Circuit, and we’ve already begun seeing decisions from the argued cases trickle in. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and a detailed discussion of our case of the week—our...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
Last week, a split Federal Circuit panel reversed a decision invalidating certain computer-aided-design patent claims because the district court used an incorrect indefiniteness standard....more
On December 8, 2021, the Federal Circuit in AztraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharms. Inc. held that the claim construction of a percentage term should “‘most naturally align[] with the patent’s description of the invention,’ as...more
In the second appeal to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the preamble term “three-dimensional spreadsheet” was found to be a limitation in the context of claims directed to organizing and presenting...more
In Seabed Geosolutions (US) Inc. v. Magseis FF LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded an inter partes review decision for the Patent Owner. The Court held that the Patent Trial and Review Board failed to perform the...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
Although things often slow down in Washington in the August heat and humidity, that wasn’t the case this past week for the Federal Circuit. All told, the Court issued 5 precedential opinions and ruled in 17 cases. Below we...more
The Federal Circuit announced last week that it will resume in-person oral arguments later this summer. The Court’s new protocols generally take effect with the September 2021 sitting, and we noticed that the Court has also...more
In post-grant proceedings since 2018, the PTAB has applied the same claim construction standard as used in district court; a recent Memorandum confirms the PTAB will likewise apply the same standard that district courts use...more
Indefiniteness under U.S. patent law is a failure to satisfy the statutory requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112(b), which reads: "The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly...more
Trial courts tend to get more than the benefit of the doubt when their decisions are viewed under the "abuse of discretion" standard, and juries similarly are affirmed unless there isn't substantial evidence supporting their...more
In the context of Immunex’s patent on IL-4 antibodies, the Federal Circuit says yes. On October 13, 2020, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (the “Board”) final written decision in...more
Claims Covering Human Engineering That Exploit a Naturally-Occurring Phenomenon Are Patent Eligible - In Illumina, Inc. V. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., Appeal No. 19-1419, the Federal Circuit modified its earlier decision...more
Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 2019-1527, (Fed. Cir. Aug 27, 2020) - In an appeal from the District of Delaware, the Federal Circuit (Judges Moore, Plager, and Wallach) vacated and remanded the district court’s judgment...more
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a district court’s construction of the terms “antibody” and “antibody fragment.” The court’s constructions were not consistent with the claim language, and nothing in the specification or...more
NEVILLE v. FOUNDATION CONSTRUCTORS, INC. Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed a construction of...more
IBSA INSTITUT BIOCHIMIQUE, S.A. V. TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware - Summary: A term may be indefinite when the proposed construction is not...more
PERSONALIZED MEDIA COMMUNICATION, LLC v. APPLE INC - Before Reyna, Taranto and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Prosecution history evidence need not rise to the level of disclaimer to...more
The Federal Circuit has issued another opinion arising from the patent conflict between The Chamberlain Group and Techtronic Industries—and, once again, a patent owned by Chamberlain suffered a major blow. In Techtronic...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding, based largely on the prosecution history, that disputed “wherein” clauses were limiting and therefore the grant of a preliminary injunction...more
The Federal Court has now released the first decision in which the scope of Section 53.1 of the Canadian Patent Act—the so-called “file wrapper estoppel” provision—has been considered. We recently published an IP Update...more
The Canadian Patent Act was amended last year to include a new provision which allows prosecution histories into evidence in patent proceedings to rebut representations made by the patentee regarding claims construction. ...more