News & Analysis as of

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Written Descriptions Appeals

Haug Partners LLP

In CRISPR Patent Dispute, the Federal Circuit Clarifies the Conception and Written Description Standards

Haug Partners LLP on

On May 12, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Regents of the Univ. of California v. Broad Inst., Inc.1 concerning the ongoing priority dispute relating to competing inventor groups for the CRISPR-Cas9 eukaryotic...more

ArentFox Schiff

Designers Beware: Prior Utility Patent Lacking Written Support Can Anticipate Later-Filed Design Patents

ArentFox Schiff on

In its recent In re Floyd opinion, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a decision by Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to reject a design applicant’s priority claim to an earlier utility filing for...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2025) - Update

Only a few days after the one-year anniversary of hearing oral argument, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. on Monday. The opinion reviewed the...more

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati

Method of Treatment Claim’s Limiting Preamble Must Satisfy the Written Description Requirement

On March 13, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in the case of In Re: Xencor, Inc. In this Appeal from the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (ARP), with regard to...more

Goodwin

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s In Re Riggs Decision: 35 USC 102(e) Prior Art Requires Written Description Support...

Goodwin on

On March 24, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Federal Circuit) issued a decision titled In Re: Riggs (the Riggs decision) that vacated a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the US...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Clarifies Requirements For A Prior Art Reference’s Entitlement To The Filing Date Of A Provisional Application To...

A&O Shearman on

On March 24, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued an opinion vacating and remanding a decision of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) that a published patent application...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: In re: Xencor, Inc.

In re: Xencor, Inc., Appeal No. 2024-1870 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2025) Our case of the week is an appeal from a decision of the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, concerning Xencor’s patent application...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal Nos. 2024-1965, -1966, -2082, -2083 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 29, 2025) Our Case of the Week is a 31-page decision that touches on a variety of issues, including...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending January 10, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Torrent Pharma Inc., et al., Nos. 2023-2218, -2220, -2221 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) Jan. 10, 2025). Opinion by Lourie, joined by Prost and Reyna. The FDA approved a New Drug Application from...more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

Third Quarter 2024 Federal Circuit Law Update

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Since serving as a Federal Circuit clerk, Michael Hawes has monitored that court's precedential opinions and prepares a deeply outlined index by subject matter (invalidity, infringement, claim construction, etc.) of relevant...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Finds Written Description Support for Narrow Claim Range via Disclosure of Broader Ranges, Vacates PTAB Decision

The Federal Circuit recently vacated a PTAB decision that claims of an “e-cigarette” patent were unpatentable for lack of written description under 35 U.S.C. § 112. The question on appeal was whether a claimed range was...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Parus Holdings, Inc. v. Google LLC, No. 2022-1269, 2022-1270 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 12, 2023)

This case concerns determining the prior art status of certain references in an inter partes review. The Federal Circuit considered whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) was correct in declining to consider...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2023 #4

United Therapeutics Corporation v. Liquidia Technologies, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2022-2217, 2023-1021 (Fed. Cir. July 24, 2023) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent case this week, the Court considered questions...more

McDermott Will & Emery

First Rule of the PTAB? Play by the Rules

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed two Patent Trial & Appeal Board decisions holding the challenged claims unpatentable as obvious, even though the Board declined to consider evidence of antedating and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

A Maze-Like Path and Laundry List Don’t Provide Written Description

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision that there was insufficient written description in the asserted priority applications to support a genus claim because of...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - March 2023

Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Gilead Sciences, Inc., Appeal No. 21-2168 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2023) The Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent opinion this week focuses on the written description requirement...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Swing and a Miss: Failed Interferences Don’t Affect Later Ones

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s (Board) interference decision finding that priority belonged to the junior party based on sufficiently corroborated reduction to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Won’t Rescue Parachute Patent

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) decision that claims to a ballistic parachute were obvious over the prior art based on knowledge attributable to artisans and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Count On It, Plural Term Means More Than One

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) patentability decisions after determining that the Board did not err in construing multiple terms within the challenged patents....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - March 2022 #2

In re: Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. and In re: Hyundai Motor America, Appeal Nos. 2022-108, -109 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2022) - In the most recent of multiple mandamus rulings issued by the Federal Circuit in relation to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - December 2021 #2

AstraZeneca AB v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 2021-1729 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 8, 2021) - Our Case of the Week again focuses on numerical values in claims. Last week we addressed a case involving whether there was...more

McDermott Will & Emery

IPR on Written Description? Claims Found Unpatentable Based on Lack of Entitlement to Priority Date

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) ruling, based on a written description analysis, that certain claims were invalid as anticipated by an earlier priority...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - November 2021 #2

Indivior UK Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories S.A., Appeal Nos. 2020-2073, -2142 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 24, 2021) - Our Case of the Week this week focuses on the written description requirement when the patent claims a range. The...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Extends Arthrex to Ex Parte Re-Examination Proceedings

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a decision issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), holding that its decisions in Arthrex and VirnetX also apply to ex parte examinations at the...more

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

Federal Circuit Appeals From The PTAB: Summaries of Key 2019 Decisions: Honeywell International Inc. v. Arkema Inc., 939 F.3d 1345...

Honeywell owns U.S. Patent 9,157,017, which claims automotive air-conditioning systems. The application to the ’017 patent had originally described and recited claims for flouroalkane compounds for use in refrigeration...more

48 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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