News & Analysis as of

Remand CAFC Obviousness

Womble Bond Dickinson

Controversy over “Composition”: Federal Circuit Highlights Drafting Discrepancy

Womble Bond Dickinson on

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

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit clarifies presumption of obviousness for overlapping ranges

A&O Shearman on

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Licensing Evidence of Nonobviousness Does Not Require Claim-Specific Nexus

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

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending July 4, 2025

Alston & Bird on

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

Knobbe Martens

An Eye Toward Prosecution History

Knobbe Martens on

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

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Fox Factory v. SRAM – According to CAFC, No Presumption of Nexus for Bicycle Chainring Patents; IPR Decision Reversed and Remanded

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

Knobbe Martens

PTAB allows Patent Owner to File Supplement to Motion to Amend in Veeam Software Corporation v. Veritas Technologies LLC

Knobbe Martens on

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

7 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