5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Verdict in T-Cell Immunotherapy IP Case Tests 'Reasonable Royalty' Concept for Large Damage Awards
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc. (24-1097) offers a compelling look at the evolving doctrine of prosecution laches, the written description requirement, and the practical realities of patent...more
On August 20, 2025, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware (court) found inequitable conduct when Applicant, Lindis Biotech, GMBH (Lindis), relied on data from hastily performed experiments to obtain a patent...more
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
Mondis Technology Ltd., et al. v. LG Electronics Inc., et al., Nos. 2023-2117, -2116 (Fed. Cir. (D.N.J.) Aug. 8, 2025). Opinion by Hughes, joined by Taranto and Clevenger....more
MONDIS TECHNOLOGY LTD., HITACHI MAXELL, LTD., NKA MAXELL HOLDINGS, LTD., MAXELL, LTD. v. LG ELECTRONICS INC., LG ELECTRONICS USA, INC. - Before Taranto, Clevenger, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court...more
For startups sensitive to cash burn rate, provisional patent applications often seem like the perfect solution—lower filing fees, simplified requirements, and a full year to file the "real" application. However, this...more
A patent applicant dissatisfied by an patent examiner's rejection of that applicant's claims in ex parte prosecution has recourse by appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under 35 U.S.C. § 134, and to the Federal...more
Mondis Tech. Ltd. v. LG Electronics Inc., Appeal Nos. 2023-2117, -2116 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 8, 2025) Our Case of the Week focuses on the written description requirement, and, in particular, how that requirement is considered...more
Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Myrbetriq is a drug used to treat overactive bladder. It utilizes a hydrogel-based sustained-release oral tablet formulation to control the rate at which the active ingredient,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that cancellation of a claim during prosecution may give rise to prosecution history estoppel, precluding the patentee from recapturing the surrendered subject...more
On July 16 2025, the Court of Appeal dismissed AstraZeneca’s appeal and upheld the first instance decision, finding that AstraZeneca’s compound patent for dapagliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor used to treat diabetes, was invalid...more
Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Astellas sued Lupin and Zydus based on the generics manufacturers’ ANDA filing and their efforts to make and sell generic mirabegron. In the leadup to the 2023 bench trial, the...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a non-precedential Rule 36 affirmance of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in In re Adhami, No. 2024-1218, 2025 WL 1949797 (Fed. Cir. July 16, 2025)....more
It is well established that an enantiomerically pure compound exhibiting advantageous properties not present in its isomer or its corresponding racemic mixture, can be patented even if its corresponding racemic mixtures are...more
On May 12, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Regents of the Univ. of California v. Broad Inst., Inc.1 concerning the ongoing priority dispute relating to competing inventor groups for the CRISPR-Cas9 eukaryotic...more
The Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in In re: Xencor, Inc.concerning written support for Jepson claims. The decision affirms the decision of the Appeals Review Panel (ARP) of the USPTO, which held that the...more
On April 22, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision In re: Bonnie Iris McDonald Floyd that underscores a critical and often overlooked risk in design patent prosecution: relying on a utility patent application for...more
In its recent In re Floyd opinion, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a decision by Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to reject a design applicant’s priority claim to an earlier utility filing for...more
Patent claims reciting compounds where at least one group of a compound genus is defined by its function are common. For example, familiar claim terms such as “chelating moiety,” “linker,” and “binding moiety” describe a...more
Addressing the distinction between conception and reduction to practice and the requirement for written description in the unpredictable arts, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that proof of conception...more
The Regents of the University of California, et al. v. The Broad Institute, Inc., et al., Nos. 2022-1594, -1653 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) May 12, 2025). Opinion by Reyna, joined by Hughes and Cunningham....more
Only a few days after the one-year anniversary of hearing oral argument, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc. on Monday. The opinion reviewed the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that a software term was a “nonce” term that invoked 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph (i.e., a means-plus-function claim element). The Court...more
On March 13, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in the case of In Re: Xencor, Inc. In this Appeal from the Appeals Review Panel of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (ARP), with regard to...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a decision that highlights a risk in design patent prosecution—specifically, attempting to claim priority to a utility application. In re Floyd, the Federal...more