Case Law Updates

Supreme Court: 1) Upholds Use of Broadest Reasonable Interpretation during Inter Partes Review; and 2) Affirms that Inter Partes Review Institution Decisions are Not Appealable

On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a long awaited opinion in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, 579 U. S. ____ (2016). In its opinion, the Supreme Court squarely sided with the United States Patent and Trademark Office, approving of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) use of the broadest reasonable interpretation […]

Read more

An Unintended Consequence of Transferring All Substantial Rights in a Patent:

In a recent decision, Azure Networks LLC v. CSR PLC (hereafter “Azure Networks”), the Federal Circuit held that the title owner of a patent may not be joined as a co-plaintiff in a patent infringement suit for purposes of standing if the title owner has transferred all substantial rights in the patent. 771 F.3d 1336 […]

Read more

Supreme Court Issues First Trademark Ruling In Ten Years, Holding That Trademark Tacking Is A Factual Determination

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on a substantive trademark matter for the first time in ten years, holding in Hana Financial, Inc. v. Hana Bank (No. 13-1211) that trademark tacking is a factual determination properly reserved for the jury (the fact finder). This ruling resolved a split in the Circuits regarding who properly decides trademark […]

Read more

Supreme Court Mandates Deference to District Court Factual Findings When Reviewing Claim Construction

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a landmark decision today in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (No. 13-854), altering the standard used by the Federal Circuit since 1998 to review claim construction determinations on appeal. This ruling is the latest in a series of recent Supreme Court decisions reversing practices previously established by the […]

Read more

USPTO’s Interim Guidance on Patent Eligibility Relaxes Limitations

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued revised guidelines for determining patent eligible subject matter following recent groundbreaking precedent, including Alice Corp., Mayo, and Myriad. The guidance substantially alters the USPTO’s earlier, more restrictive examination procedures and instructions to examiners, and address the implications of those recent decisions in a more nuanced and […]

Read more

Supreme Court’s Alice Decision Strikes a Blow Against Patent Trolls in Confirming that Adding the Words “Apply It With A Computer” Does Not Make an Abstract Idea Patentable

A unanimous Supreme Court today ruled that software patents based on abstract ideas that merely require generic computer implementation are ineligible for patent protection, affirming the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l. This ruling does not render all software-related inventions ineligible for […]

Read more

Unfair Competition Claims Under the Lanham Act Not Precluded by the FDCA or FDA Food Labeling Regulations

In POM Wonderful LLC v. The Coca Cola Co., 572 U.S. ___ (Jun. 12, 2014), a unanimous Supreme Court held that a private suit brought by a competitor under § 43 of the Lanham Act is not precluded by the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (FDCA) and the FDA regulations. POM Wonderful LLC—a maker of […]

Read more

Liability for Induced Infringement Requires a Direct Infringer

Today, a unanimous Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit and held that induced infringement of a method claim cannot be found in the absence of direct infringement by a single party under §271(a). Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., 572 U.S. __(June 2, 2014). The claims at issue in the underlying Limelight action were […]

Read more

Unanimous Supreme Court Reverses The Federal Circuit on Patent Definiteness Standard

The U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision today in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. (No. 13-369), a closely watched case involving the statutory requirement of distinct patent claiming. This is the latest in a series of recent cases in which the Supreme Court has overruled the Federal Circuit on critical patent issues. In […]

Read more

Pre-Empting the Supreme Court? The Federal Circuit Approves a Test for Indefiniteness at the USPTO

Indefiniteness is evaluated under a different standard for an issued patent claim than for a pre-issuance claim. On May 6, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in In re Packard.[1] Packard involved claims of a patent application in prosecution at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). The USPTO rejected the claims as being indefinite […]

Read more

Previous Entries Next Entries

Please enter your e-mail address to receive a link to the webinar video.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.