News & Analysis as of

Patents Substantial Evidence Standard Patent Infringement

McDermott Will & Schulte

Specification controls: Written description must be clear

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s decision upholding patent validity, finding that the subject patent’s specification clearly established that the written description failed to...more

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

PTAB Strategies and Insights Newsletter: May 2022

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Jennewein Biotechnologie GmbH v. International Trade Commission (Fed. Cir. 2021)

The International Trade Commission can more readily provide injunctive relief against an adjudged infringer than a district court, under appropriate conditions (i.e., with regard to an infringing product or a product made by...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Standard Essentiality Is a Question for the Fact Finder

Affirming a jury verdict of infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the question of whether patent claims are essential to all implementations of an industry standard should be resolved by...more

Knobbe Martens

Safe Harbor Defense Under 35 U.S.C. §271(e)(1) Requires That the Accused Activity Is Solely for Uses Reasonably Related to...

Knobbe Martens on

AMGEN INC. v. HOSPIRA, INC. Before Moore, Bryson, and Chen.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Biological engineering activity that would otherwise constitute patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Clarifies Appellate Jurisdiction to Review Attorney Fees Awards

Knobbe Martens on

ELBIT SYSTEMS LAND AND C4I LTD. v. HUGHES NETWORK SYSTEMS, LLC - Before Taranto, Mayer, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: Neither 28 U.S.C. § 1295 nor 28...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more

Knobbe Martens

UC v. Broad Institute: No Interference-In-Fact in CRISPR Genome Editing Applications

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - On September 10, 2018, the Federal Circuit decided Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc., affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)’s determination of no...more

Knobbe Martens

IXI IP, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before O’Malley, Mayer, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claims may be rejected under 35 § U.S.C. 103 based on implicit disclosures of a prior art reference....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2018

Knobbe Martens on

The Board’s Final Written Decision Must Address All Grounds for Unpatentability Raised in a Petition for Inter Partes Review - In Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2018-1180, 2018-1181, the Federal Circuit held that...more

Knobbe Martens

Westerngeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corporation

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Wallach, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party may not be time-barred from instituting an IPR despite having a business relationship with a...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - January 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Where Parties Raise an Actual Dispute Regarding Claim Scope, the Court Must Resolve It In Nobelbiz, Inc. v. Global Connect, L.L.C., Appeal Nos. 2016-1104, 2016-1105, the Federal Circuit held that where parties raise an actual...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - November 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Fractured Federal Circuit Holds Patent Owner Does Not Bear Burden of Persuasion in IPR Motions to Amend - In Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, Appeal No. 2015-1177, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, held that a patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - October 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Denies En Banc Rehearing in Mentor Graphics v. EVE-USA - In Mentor Graphics Corp. v. Eve-USA, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2015-1470, 2015-1554, 2015-1556, the Federal Circuit denied Synopsys’ and EVE’s petition for...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

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

In Allied v. OSMI, the Circuit affirms dismissal of a declaratory judgment action even though Allied’s Mexican distributors had been sued in Mexico on a corresponding Mexican patent. In a first Waymo v. Uber case, the panel...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

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

In Mylan v. Aurobindo the Circuit affirms the grant of a preliminary injunction based upon the infringement of one of the three patents in suit. However, the panel reverses the injunction as to the other two patents based on...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

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Federal Circuit Rejects Board’s Understanding of Prior Art

The Federal Circuit has now reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision in Synopsys, Inc. v. ATopTech, Inc. finding claims 1 and 32 of U.S. Patent No. 6,567,967 (the “‘967 patent”) as being “not supported by...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Smartphone Patent War: En Banc Federal Circuit Rebukes Earlier Panel Decision and Reinstates Jury Verdicts for Apple against...

McDermott Will & Schulte on

In its October 7 en banc decision in Apple v. Samsung, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, without benefit of en banc briefing, issued an unusual opinion overturning a panel decision for the purpose of...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Overview of Comments on the USPTO's July 2015 Update to the Interim Examination Guidance

Fenwick & West LLP on

In late July, the USPTO issued its July 2015 Update to the 2014 Interim Section 101 Patent Eligibility Guidance (IEG). The July 2015 Update addresses a number of the issues and concerns raised in the public comments to the...more

20 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