DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
In a precedential ruling that underscores the importance of consistency in claim drafting, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a claim construction based on an improper interpretation of the...more
The Federal Circuit recently issued a significant decision in the ongoing patent litigation between Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings (Labcorp) and Qiagen Sciences, LLC, reversing a Delaware district court’s judgment...more
In a significant blow to Apple, the Federal Circuit recently vacated a summary judgment of noninfringement in the case of Taction Technology, Inc. v. Apple Inc. The dispute centers on Taction’s U.S. Patent Nos. 10,659,885 and...more
POWERBLOCK HOLDING, INC. v. IFIT, INC. - Before Taranto, Stoll, and District Judge Scarsi. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah. Under step one of the Alice test, claims should be considered...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a preliminary injunction (PI), finding that the district court improperly construed a claim term based on references cited in a provisional application but...more
In a mixed ruling on evidentiary exclusions and damages methodology, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed in part, reversed in part, vacated in part, and remanded a district court’s decision that excluded...more
After the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s non-obviousness determination, the district court again found that Teva failed to show, by clear and convincing evidence, that the claims of Janssen’s patent...more
The Federal Circuit recently vacated a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board after concluding that the board’s analysis of licensing evidence offered as a secondary consideration of nonobviousness constituted legal...more
Legal decisions, like fine wine, should be balanced. The Federal Circuit recently corked a non-precedential TTAB decision that ECHO D’ANGÉLUS was not confusingly similar to ECHO DE LYNCH BAGES, where both were used for wine,...more
Eye Therapies, LLC v. Slayback Pharma, LLC, No. 2023-2173 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) June 30, 2025). Opinion by Scarsi, joined by Taranto and Stoll. Eye Therapies owns a patent that claims a method for reducing eye redness...more
EYE THERAPIES, LLC v. SLAYBACK PHARMA LLC - Before Taranto, Stoll and Scarsi (sitting by designation). The patent’s prosecution history required a restrictive interpretation of the term “consisting essentially of.”...more
On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) revived the Regents of the University of California’s (Regents) challenge to the Broad Institute’s CRISPR-Cas9 patents, overturning a 2022 decision by...more
OPTIS CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY, LLC v. APPLE INC. - Before Prost, Reyna, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Patent plaintiffs have a right to a unanimous verdict on each...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding of infringement but vacated its damages award because the award improperly included auxiliary products lacking any functional relationship to...more
A recent (February 9, 2023) US Court of International Trade ("CIT") remand opinion, Meyer Corp., US v. United States, has revived various global supply-chain apprehensions that a previous (August 11, 2022) reversal by the US...more
The Federal Circuit recently issued another decision in a longstanding dispute between Willis Electric Co. and Polygroup Ltd. involving two patents owned by Willis (U.S. Patent Nos. 8,454,186 and 8,454,187) directed to...more
Earlier this month, in the precedential decision New Vision Gaming & Development, Inc. v. SG Gaming, Inc., FKA Bally Gaming, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the CAFC”) vacated and remanded a decision by...more
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - M & K HOLDINGS, INC. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. [OPINION] (2020-1160, 2/1/2021) (Moore, Bryson, Chen) Bryson, J. Affirming PTAB decision that references qualified as prior...more
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has denied the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) unopposed motion to stay its mandate issued in Arthrex. The USPTO filed its motion seeking a 90 day stay...more
On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Fox Factory v. SRAM, Nos. 2018-2024 and 2018-2025, reversed the Board’s Final Written Decision in a pair of inter partes reviews (“IPRs”)...more
On November 16, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board amended its standard operating procedures and issued new guidance for parties as to what happens after the Federal Circuit remands a case. Prior to this guidance, PTAB panels...more
On November 16, 2017 the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office posted a new Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) addressing the conduct of cases remanded from the Federal Circuit to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). New “SOP...more
On remand from the Federal Circuit the PTAB granted authorization for a patent owner to file a supplement to its Motion to Amend in Veeam Software Corporation v. Veritas Technologies LLC, IPR2014-00090, Paper 42 (P.T.A.B....more
In an en banc decision issued in The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., the Federal Circuit determined that in order for a commercial transaction to trigger the on-sale bar of § 35 USC 102(b), it must “bear the general...more
The Federal Circuit ruled that the cryopreservation methods at issue in Rapid Litigation Mgmt. Ltd. v. CellzDirect Inc., are patent eligible under 35 USC § 101. It therefore vacated and remanded the decision of the U.S....more