Blog Profile / Patent Law Blog (Patently-O)


URL :http://www.patentlyo.com/patent/index.html
Filed Under:Industries / Law
Posts on Regator:2818
Posts / Week:7.4
Archived Since:February 15, 2010

Blog Post Archive

Patentlyo Bits and Bytes by Anthony McCain

Gene Quinn: SCOTUS Reverses Federal Circuit In TC Heartland Shawn Knight: Apple And Nokia Settle Intellectual Property Dispute Vera Ranieri: No Evidence That “Stronger” Patents Will Mean More Innovation Donald Zuhn: Biscotti v. Microsoft Scott Mckeown: Public vs. Show More Summary

Chisum on IPR Initiation

In an email distribution regarding their upcoming Chisum Patent Academy, Don Chisum and Janice Mueller opine on the upcoming Supreme Court case of SAS v. Lee. They write: The Court will address, at least indirectly, the PTO’s rule 37 CFR § 42.108(a). The rule allows the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to institute inter partes review […]

Fame is Relative in the Trademark Context

by Dennis Crouch Joseph Phelps Vineyards v. Fairmont Holdings (Fed. Cir. 2017) Phelps Vineyards has been selling its INSIGNIA wine for the past 40 years — often at $200+ per bottle. In 2012, Fairmont received its federal registration for the mark ALEC BRADLEY STAR INSIGNIA for cigars.  Phelps Vineyard petitioned for cancellation before the Trademark Trial […]

The DTSA Giveth But Does Not Taketh Away

Further thoughts on the Defend Trade Secrets Act and inevitable disclosure Guest post by Maxwell Goss. Dr. Goss is a business litigator with Rossman Saxe, P.C. in Troy, Michigan. His practice focuses on non-compete, trade secret, intellectual property, and shareholder law and litigation. Dr. Goss blogs at Law and the Creative Economy. Last week I wrote […]

Written Description’s Shifting Focus to the Accused Embodiment

by Dennis Crouch Rivera v. ITC and Solofill (Fed. Cir. 2017) After conducting an investigation, a divided majority of commissioners of the USITC found no-violation of Adrian Rivera’s U.S. Patent No. 8,720,320 directed toward a re-usable K-cup that work with coffee pods. Show More Summary

Supreme Court Reins-In Patent Venue

by Dennis Crouch In TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the Supreme Court has significantly shifted the balance away from the geographically fringe Eastern District of Texas – holding that the residence requirement of 28 U.S.C. Show More Summary

SAS Institute v. Lee: Inter Partes Review Institution Decision Limits

by Dennis Crouch The Supreme Court has agreed to hear a new AIA-trials case: SAS Institute v. Lee The inter partes review appeal focuses on the procedural question of whether the America Invents Act permits the USPTO to partially institute IPR proceedings – as it has been doing. SAS argues instead that the statute requires a full up/down vote […]

Guest Post: Where we Stand with Trade Secret Enforcement in Federal Courts

Guest Post by Prof. David Opderbeck (Seton Hall), originally published on his blog The CyberSecurity Lawyer. Introduction Trade secrets are important to cybersecurity because many data breaches involve trade secret theft.  The Defend...Show More Summary

SAS Institute Inc. v. Lee: Challenging Partial Institution

The Supreme court has relisted SAS Institute Inc. v. Lee, 16-969 – an important step in the progress toward grant of certiorari.  The inter partes review case presents the following question: Whether 35 U.S.C. § 318(a) … requires [the] Board to issue a final written decision as to every claim challenged by the petitioner, or whether it allows that Board to […]

The Defend Trade Secrets Act and Inevitable Disclosure

When Can a Company That Hires its Competitor’s Former Employee Be Sued in Federal Court? Guest post by Maxwell Goss.  Dr. Goss is a business litigator with Rossman Saxe, P.C. in Troy, Michigan. His practice focuses on non-compete, trade secret, intellectual property, and shareholder law and litigation. The Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) was enacted a […]

AIPLA On Board with Statutory Reform of 101

The AIPLA has now offered its legislative proposal for rewriting 35 U.S.C. § 101 that is quite close to that offered by the IPO: Inventions Patentable (a) Eligible Subject Matter.—Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or any useful improvement thereof, may obtainshall be entitled to a patent therefor, […]

Shore v. Lee

In Shore v. Lee, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB finding without opinion.  Shore’s petition to the Supreme Court asks whether “the Federal Circuit’s affirmance without opinion of the PTO’s rejection of Petitioner’s patent application violate 35 U.S.C. Show More Summary

Moot the Dispute? Not

ArcelorMittal v. AK Steel Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2017) In a split decision, the Federal Circuit has affirmed a district court judgment invalidating ArcelorMittal’s U.S. Patent No. RE44,153 (claim 24 and 25).  The primary disputed issue was...Show More Summary

Remarks By Director Michelle K. Lee at the George Washington University School of Law

The following is an excerpt from PTO Director Michelle Lee’s keynote address today, at George Washington University Law School. Read the full remarks here.- DC How do we continue to incentivize … incredible innovations? First, we must ensure that the USPTO issues the highest quality patents as quickly and efficiently as possible. This means, at a […]

IPR Petition Response => Claim Construction Disclaimer

Aylus Networks v. Apple (Fed. Cir. 2017) The court here holds that claim construction “prosecution disclaimer” applies to statements made by the patentee in a preliminary response to an IPR proceeding.  This holding makes sense and was entirely expected — however it also sets yet another trap for patentees seeking to enforce their patent rights. The appeal […]

EasyWeb => Easy 101 Invalidation

EasyWeb v. Twitter (Fed. Cir. 2017) (nonprecedential opinion) In this case, the appellate court affirmed summary judgment that all of the asserted claims of five EasyWeb patents are ineligible under the Mayo/Alice interpretation of 35 U.S.C. Show More Summary

No real consensus yet on CBM Sunsetting

Once initiated, CBMs are identical to post-grant reviews (PGR) – allowing for patents to be challenged on any patentability grounds.  As implemented, this includes 101 and 112 challenges in addition to the more traditional obviousness and novelty grounds.   PGRs, however, are limited to only AIA-patents and must be filed within a 9-month window from issuance. […]

Oil States: Trump Admin Supports AIA Trial Proceedings

Oil States v. Greene’s Energy (Supreme Court 2017). After receiving party briefs in this case, the Supreme Court requested a responsive brief from the Michelle Lee in her role as PTO Director on the constitutionality of the AIA trial system.  That brief has now been by the new acting Solicitor General Jeff Wall who handled a number of patent cases in private […]

Survey: Should We Extend the Covered Business Method Review Program?

The Covered Business Method Review program is a transitional program that sunsets in 2020.  These AIA trails have been extremely effective at knocking-out patents that qualify for review.   The question of the day is whether Congress should extend and possibly expand the program beyond the 2020 deadline and beyond the non-technological financial services limitations.

Copyright © 2015 Regator, LLC