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
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
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
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
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 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