News & Analysis as of

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Inter Partes Reexamination Patent Infringement

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

Reexamination of Expired Patents

Takeaways - - Expired patents may be eligible for reexamination. - Owner’s options during reexamination of an expired patent are severely limited. Similar to reexamination practice, which has long allowed reexamination...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2021 Decisions

[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...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

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer

Biosimilar Litigation Trends and Lessons Learned in 2019

It has been nearly 10 years since the U.S. Biosimilars Pathway (the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act) was enacted. The first biosimilar product in U.S. history was approved and launched in 2015. Ten biosimilars...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Mere Potential for Future Appeal Does Not Prevent Triggering Estoppel of Inter Partes Reexamination When Party Fails to Seek Relief in the First Instance - In Virnetx Inc. v. Apple Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1591, -1592,...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2019

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Celgene Corporation v. Laura A. Peter, Appeal Nos. 2018-1167, -1168, -1169, -1171 (Fed. Cir. July 30, 2019) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit held that the retroactive...more

Jones Day

Reexamination Does not Reset the IPR Clock

Jones Day on

In Apple v. IXI IP, the PTAB affirmed that the issuance of a reexamination certificate adding additional claims to a challenged patent does not reset the one-year time bar under § 315(b) to file a petition for inter partes...more

Jones Day

Update: Does § 315(e)(2) Say What It Means and Mean What It Says?

Jones Day on

When an IPR petition results in a final written decision, the IPR petitioner (or the petitioner’s real party in interest or privy) is estopped from asserting in a civil litigation or an ITC action that “the claim is invalid...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 and Early 2018 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

PTAB Invalidation of Patents Following Jury Verdict of Infringement Does Not Necessarily Impact Willfulness Finding

In a recent decision, Judge Schroeder of the Eastern District of Texas rejected the argument that decisions of the United State Patent and Trade Office (USPTO) invalidating patents held infringed by a jury means that a...more

Jones Day

ITC Remains Unpersuaded by Final PTAB Rulings

Jones Day on

This week the ITC stood firm in its position that final PTAB rulings of unpatentability in IPR proceedings are not grounds to modify, suspend, or rescind remedial orders. In Certain Foam Footwear, Inv. No. 337-TA-567, the ITC...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more

BakerHostetler

Patent Office Updates Rules for Post-Grant Proceeding Duty of Candor

BakerHostetler on

The United States Patent and Trademark Office recently amended 37 C.F.R. § 42.11 to include a certification requirement similar to that of Rule 11. Section 42.11 prescribes the duty of candor owed to the Patent Office. As...more

McDermott Will & Emery

New Party Has No Cause of Action to Appeal PTAB Decision (Agilent Technologies, Inc. v. Waters Technologies Corp.)

Addressing the statutory cause of action requirement to appeal a reexamination decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal, finding that the appellant was not a third-party requester of the...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Inphi v. Netlist: Alternative Features Satisfy the Patent Written Description Requirement for a Negative Claim Limitation

It can be tricky to evaluate written description support under 35 U.S.C. § 112 for negative claim limitations since the support may amount to the absence of a feature from an invention that is described positively with...more

BakerHostetler

Attorney Fees for Post-Grant Patent Challenge Proceedings Before the USPTO May Be Recoverable in Exceptional Cases Under 35 U.S.C....

BakerHostetler on

Parties accused of patent infringement are turning more and more to post-grant challenge proceedings at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) as a faster and cheaper means for invalidating the asserted...more

16 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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