News & Analysis as of

Patent Trial and Appeal Board POSITA Appeals

McDermott Will & Emery

Construing Unambiguous Claim Language and Qualifying Challenged Expert as POSITA

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issues of claim construction and the requisite expert qualifications to testify on obviousness and anticipation, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision...more

Knobbe Martens

Unforced Error: An IPR Challenger Cannot Rely on an Error That a Posita Would Have Corrected

Knobbe Martens on

LG ELECTRONICS INC. v. IMMERVISION INC. Before Stoll, Cunningham, and Newman, Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Where a reference contains an “obvious”...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

Does the Term “Human Antibody” Include Humanized Antibodies?

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

Knobbe Martens

Finite Methods as a Ground for Obviousness

Knobbe Martens on

UBER TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. X ONE, INC. Before Prost, Dyk, and Wallach. Appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Because a mapping technique must be performed on either a...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Unsupported Expert Testimony Isn’t Enough to Establish Motivation to Combine

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding regarding motivation to combine based only on conclusory expert testimony was not supported by substantial...more

Jones Day

Mere Similarity Between References is Insufficient Rationale for Obviousness

Jones Day on

On May 8, 2019, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of inter partes review in William Wesley Carnes, Sr., Inc. v. Seaboard Int’l Inc., No. IPR2019-00133, holding that the mere fact that prior art references...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Finds Claims Directed to Tabbed Spreadsheets Patent Eligible and Claims Directed to Tracking Changes in Documents Ineligible Under Section 101 - In Data Engine Technologies LLC v. Google LLC, Appeal No....more

Jones Day

Post-Priority Document Usable As Evidence of POSITA Motivation

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) final written decisions finding the claims of Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd.’s (“Yeda”) U.S. Patent Nos. 8,232,250, 8,399,413, and...more

Knobbe Martens

Yeda Research And Development Co., Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. & Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Judges Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeals from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Non-prior art evidence may...more

9 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