Skip to main content

Intellectual Property

Viewpoints

Filter by:

ALJ Lord Amends Ground Rules to Permit Reply Briefs

November 24, 2014 | Blog | By Aarti Shah

On November 17, 2014, Administrative Law Judge Dee Lord amended her Ground Rules to permit parties filing motions to file a reply brief without first seeking leave from the ALJ.
Read more

Indefiniteness: Are You Reasonably Certain?

November 21, 2014 | Blog | By Pedro Suarez, Tom Jackman

The indefiniteness standard has, until recently, been very high—only an “insolubly ambiguous claim” was considered indefinite (see, e.g., Honeywell Intern., Inc. v. International Trade, 341 F. 3d 1332, 1338–9 (Fed. Cir. 2003))—but recent events have made it easier to invalidate a claim as being indefinite.
Read more

Tips for Writing Effective PTAB Appeals Briefs

November 13, 2014 | Blog | By Christina Sperry

Your patent application has been rejected – again. You are ready to file an appeal brief with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and tell three Administrative Patent Judges that the examiner is wrong. 
Read more

New European Unity Rules in Effect November 1, 2014

November 3, 2014 | Blog | By Christina Sperry, David Wraige

Good news for European patent applicants! On November 1, 2014, amended Rule 164 of the European Patent Convention (EPC), which was previously analyzed by Global IP Matters, finally went into effect.
Read more

Electronically Signing USPTO Papers: There’s a Rule for That

October 20, 2014 | Blog | By Christina Sperry

Ten years ago, on September 21, 2004, the USPTO implemented the portion of the 21st Century Strategic Plan permitting the use of electronic or mechanical signatures, called “S-signatures,” on papers filed at the USPTO.
Read more
Two recent Federal Circuit decisions emphasize that characterizing the “present invention” by using that term in a U.S. patent application specification can limit the claims according to that characterization.
Read more
On October 1, 2014, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) announced the After Final Consideration Pilot 2.0 (“AFCP 2.0”) – a program intended to provide new features that will enhance communication between the USPTO and the applicant, as compared with the original After Final Consideration Pilot (“AFCP”).
Read more
The Federal Circuit recently denied en banc review of its prior decision dismissing a patent infringement suit where a co-owner of the patent-in-suit refused to join the case voluntarily and the court held that it could not force the co-owner to join the suit involuntarily.
Read more

Marking of patented products in the UK

October 1, 2014 | Blog | By David Wraige, Julian Crump

The first parts of the new UK Intellectual Property Act 2014 come into force today. The act will introduce a range of new measures, one of which is that it expands the options available to patent proprietors for marking patented products.
Read more

What’s Happening with Patents at the USPTO? Chief of Staff Byrnes has Answers!

September 19, 2014 | Blog | By Lisa Adams, Linda Azrin

On September 16, 2014, United States Patent and Trademark Office Chief of Staff Andrew Byrnes presented to the Boston Patent Law Association an update on new quality initiatives and the implementation of White House patent policies.
Read more

ITC Judge Essex Adds His Voice to the SEP-FRAND Debate

July 11, 2014 | Blog | By Sandra Badin, Michael Renaud

Administrative Law Judge Essex of the International Trade Commission (“ITC”) recently issued the public version of his decision in ITC investigation No. 337-TA-868. 
Read more
In Actavis Group HF v. Eli Lilly & Co. the UK High Court has granted a declaration of non-infringement in the UK, France, Italy and Spain. A jurisdictional challenge in relation to the French, Italian and Spanish jurisdictions was rejected.
Read more

Could Federal Circuit Decision Weaken FRAND Defense?

May 7, 2014 | Blog | By Aarti Shah

On Monday, May 5, 2014, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, by transferring the Microsoft v. Motorola case to the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, issued an order which may significantly impact the ability of participants in standard-setting organizations (“SSOs”) to obtain relief for patent infringement.
Read more
The International Trade Commission (ITC) issued its much-awaited decision in Certain Digital Models on April 3, 2014, affirming in a decision with important implications for the software and media industries that digital importation is within the jurisdiction of the Commission.
Read more
On March 10, 2014, Sonos announced it would forward-publish its patent applications before they would traditionally be available to the public. This has given rise to quite a bit of discussion in patent legal circles.
Read more
On March 4, 2014, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued a memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps with guidance for determining the patent eligibility of claims relating to products of nature and laws of nature (“the Guidance”) in view of the U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Assoc. for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (“Myriad”) and Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (“Prometheus”).
Read more

Federal Circuit Decision Impacts Patent Term Adjustment Calculation

February 7, 2014 | Blog | By Christina Stock

Recently, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Novartis v. Lee (2013-1160, Fed. Cir., Jan. 15, 2014) which alters Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) calculations for patents where a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) was filed during prosecution.
Read more
The European Patent Office (EPO) has announced rule changes that will provide applicants with the option to have additional searches carried out during the European regional phase of Euro-Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications.
Read more

Divisionals U-Turn at the EPO

October 22, 2013 | Blog | By David Wraige

News broke last week that the European Patent Office's (EPO) Administrative Council has decided to remove the time limits for filing divisional applications. As of 1 April 2014, applicants will be able to file divisional applications at any time whilst an application is pending at the EPO.
Read more

Questions Remain in US - Is Software Patentable?

May 18, 2013 | Blog | By Rich Gervase, Peter Snell

After an en banc hearing at the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), questions remain about the patent eligibility of software under US Patent and Trademark Office rules (specifically, § 101). 
Read more

Explore Other Viewpoints: