USPTO Issues Interim Guidance on Patent Eligibility Under §101: Framework for Considering Whether Patents Are Eligible for US Patent Protection Significantly Improved
December 17, 2014 | Alert | By Michael Van Loy, Inna Dahlin
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued revised guidance to its examiners relating to determination of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101.
December 15, 2014 | Blog | By Dave Cotta
On December 9, 2014, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) upheld the validity of three Supernus Pharmaceutical’s patents relating to once-daily formulations of doxycycline.
December 10, 2014 | Blog | By Matthew Karambelas, Sean Casey
For the first time since the Supreme Court’s Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l decision this past summer, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has found that a patent claiming a software-related invention was patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (with Judge Chen writing the majority opinion).
Fed. Circuit: No “Bright Line Rules” For Determining RAND Royalties; Rejects District Court Method of Computing RAND Royalty Rates
December 9, 2014 | Blog | By Robert Moore
Courts in the last two years have grappled with what methodology to apply to determine a reasonable royalty rate for infringed patents subject to “Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory,” or “RAND,” encumbrances.
November 26, 2014 | Blog | By Aarti Shah, Nick Armington
On February 5, 2015 the en banc Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in the matter of Suprema, Inc. v. ITC., Case No. 2012-1170 (Fed. Cir.).
A Brief Synopsis of the Issues Confronting the Federal Circuit in the En Banc Rehearing of Suprema, Inc. v. ITC
November 25, 2014 | Advisory | By Aarti Shah, Nicholas Armington
On February 5, 2015 the en banc Federal Circuit will hear oral argument in the matter of Suprema, Inc. v. ITC.
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.
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.
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.
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.
October 30, 2014 | Advisory | By Terri Shieh-Newton
The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) was signed into law on September 16, 2011. While the AIA alters U.S. patent practice in several ways, perhaps the most significant change brought about by the law is the switch from a “first to invent” to a “first inventor to file” system, largely for purposes of harmonizing U.S. practice with the majority of other countries.
Inter Partes Review Initial Filings of Paramount Importance: What Is Clear After Two Years of Inter Partes Review Under the AIA
October 21, 2014 | Advisory | By Michael McNamara, Patrick Driscoll
September 16, 2014, marked the two year anniversary since certain provisions of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act went into effect, including post-grant Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
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.
October 8, 2014 | Advisory
Mintz Levin is constantly monitoring the global IP marketplace, and we like to keep our clients and friends aware of impactful developments. Below is a summary of last week’s patent-focused Global IP Matters blog posts.
October 8, 2014 | Blog | By Christina Sperry
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.
October 3, 2014 | Blog | By Lisa Adams
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”).
October 2, 2014 | Blog | By Matthew Hurley
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.
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.
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.
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.
Explore Other Viewpoints:
- Arbitration, Mediation & Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Bankruptcy & Restructuring
- Class Action
- Complex Commercial Litigation
- Consumer Product Safety
- Debt Financing
- EB-5 Financing
- Education & Nonprofits
- Employment, Labor & Benefits
- Energy & Sustainability
- Environmental Enforcement Defense
- Environmental Law
- FDA Regulatory
- Federal Circuit Appeals
- Financial Institution Litigation
- Government Law
- Health Care
- Health Care Compliance, Fraud and Abuse, & Regulatory Counseling
- Health Care Enforcement & Investigations
- Health Care Transactions
- Health Information Privacy & Security
- IP Due Diligence
- IPR's & Other Post Grant Proceedings
- Insolvency & Creditor Rights Litigation
- Institutional Investor Class Action Recovery
- Insurance & Financial Services
- Insurance Consulting & Risk Management
- Insurance and Reinsurance Problem-Solving & Dispute Resolution
- Intellectual Property
- Investment Funds
- Licensing & Technology Transactions
- Life Sciences
- Litigation & Investigations
- M&A Litigation
- ML Strategies
- Medicare, Medicaid and Commercial Coverage & Reimbursement
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- Patent Litigation
- Patent Prosecution & Strategic Counseling
- Privacy & Cybersecurity
- Private Client
- Private Equity
- Products Liability & Complex Tort
- Project Development & Finance
- Public Finance
- Real Estate Litigation
- Real Estate Transactions
- Real Estate, Construction & Infrastructure
- Retail & Consumer Products
- Securities & Capital Markets
- Securities Litigation
- Sports & Entertainment
- Strategic IP Monetization & Licensing
- Trade Secrets
- Trademark & Copyright
- Trademark Litigation
- Venture Capital & Emerging Companies
- White Collar Defense & Government Investigations