TOP BRAND LLC v. COZY COMFORT CO. LLC - Before Dyk, Reyna, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Arizona. Summary: Arguments presented during prosecution of a design-patent application...more
Concluding that the principles of prosecution history disclaimer apply to design patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s denial of judgment as a matter of law and entry of a jury...more
While design patents follow many of the same rules as utility patents, the application of those rules in determining design patent infringement can be less than straightforward. But a recent Initial Determination by ALJ...more
Addressing the intersection of claim scope and prosecution history estoppel for design patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that prosecution history estoppel does not preclude enforcing a broader...more
Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - JTEKT Corporation v. GKN Automotive Ltd., Appeal No. 2017-1828 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 3, 2018) The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from an inter partes review, holding that, although JTEKT...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Newman, Clevenger and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: Prosecution history estoppel does not bar enforcement of a...more
Patent practitioners are probably well familiar with circumstances in which prosecution history estoppel can limit the scope of a U.S. utility patent’s claims. Examples include claim amendments and statements made by the...more