Mealey's Patents

  • September 18, 2020

    In Cross-Appeal, Petitioner Says Board Erred In Allowing Amended Claims

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 4 response and cross-appellant brief, a petitioner for inter partes review (IPR) with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals asserts that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board correctly deemed obvious challenged claims of a patent but erred in granting the patent owner leave to amend in order to add substitute claims (Zaxcom Inc. v. Lectrosonics Inc., Nos. 2020-1350, -1405, Fed. Cir.).

  • September 18, 2020

    Amicus Brief Filed In Appeal Asserting Patent Board Incentivizes IPRs

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 2 lifted a stay it entered in July in a dispute over two gaming patents; the same day, a nonprofit inventors association filed an amicus curiae brief in the case, urging the appeals court to take up an appellant's assertion that the administrative patent judge (APJ) system employed by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) violates due process (New Vision Gaming and Development Inc. v. SG Gaming Inc., No. 20-1399, Fed. Cir.).

  • September 17, 2020

    D.C. Federal Judge: FDA Disregarded Approval Timelines Under FDCA

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 15 opinion, a federal judge in the District of Columbia indicated that although he agrees that new chemical entity (NCE) exclusivity status does not bar the U.S. Food and Drug Administration from approving a competing drug, the FDA's approval of "Numbrino" ran afoul of timelines prescribed by federal law (Genus Lifesciences Inc. v. Alex M. Azar, et al., No. 20-211, D. D.C., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 168370).

  • September 16, 2020

    Currency Trading Patent Singled Out For Covered Business Method Review

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a petition filed Sept. 15 with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, a New Jersey-based online trading company seeks covered business method (CBM) review of seven claims of a patent directed to currency trading, "an age-old business practice stretching back generations" (GAIN Capital Holdings Inc. v. OANDA Corporation, No. CBM2020-00021, PTAB).

  • September 15, 2020

    HP Petition For Mandamus Granted By Federal Circuit; Patent Case Transferred

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 15 per curiam order, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ordered a patent dispute to proceed in California, deeming a Texas federal judge's denial of HP Inc.'s motion to transfer there "clearly wrong" (In re: HP Inc., No. 20-140, Fed. Cir.).

  • September 15, 2020

    Post-Grant Review Petition Says Recently Issued Patent Is Ineligible

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent applicant led an examiner "astray" in connection with application of the two-part test for patent eligibility espoused in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014), a petitioner for post-grant review (PGR) tells the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in a Sept. 12 petition (Interactive Communications International Inc. v. Blackhawk Network Inc., No. PGR2020-00085, PTAB).

  • September 15, 2020

    HP, Microsoft, Others Persuade Board To Review Sensor Stack Patent

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Sept. 14 ruling, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board found that various petitioners for inter partes review (IPR) of a position sensor patent established a reasonable likelihood that they will prevail with respect to at least one of the 13 claims that are being challenged (HP Inc., et al. v. Neodron Ltd, No. IPR2020-00459, PTAB).

  • September 14, 2020

    Garmin Appeal Of Adverse Patent Board Ruling Rejected By Panel

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Substantial evidence supports findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that Garmin International Inc. and its subsidiary failed to prove that various claims of a patented motion correcting device are obvious, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 11 (Garmin International Inc., et al. v. LoganTree LP, Nos. 2020-1108, -1109, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28893).

  • September 11, 2020

    Train Warning Device Correctly Deemed Obvious, Federal Circuit Says

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 8 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals confirmed findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that various claims of two patents directed to a train warning device are unpatentable (Siemens Mobility Inc. v. Andrei Iancu, Nos. 2019-1732, -1752, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28404).

  • September 11, 2020

    In Patient Portal Patent Row, Panel Upholds Ineligibility Findings

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Efforts by an inventor to overturn findings by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that his patent application claims ineligible subject matter were unsuccessful on Sept. 8, when the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld the rejection (Angadbir Singh Salwan v. Andrei Iancu, et al., No. 20-1061, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28404).

  • September 11, 2020

    Spinal Cord Stimulation Patent Is Obvious, Petitioner Tells Board

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Sept. 8 petition for inter partes review (IPR), a medical device company and its subsidiary maintain that a method of identifying implanted leads and transmitting electrical pulses through electrodes to stimulate targeted tissue within the spinal cord is unpatentable (Boston Scientific Corporation, et al. v. Nevro Corporation, No. IPR2020-01562, PTAB).

  • September 10, 2020

    Federal Circuit Rejects Bid For 'Greater Relief' Than Arthrex Remedy

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although agreeing with a patent owner that a final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board declaring various patent claims obvious or anticipated must be vacated and remanded pursuant to Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., No. 18-2140 (Fed. Cir.), the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Sept. 9 stopped short of awarding the patent owner's request for "greater relief" (Snyders Heart Valve LLC v. St. Jude Medical LLC, No. 19-2111, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28521).

  • September 10, 2020

    In Google, Blackberry Patent Cross-Appeals, Federal Circuit Affirms Board

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 2 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no reversible error in two final written decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that resulted in the confirmation that some claims of a Blackberry Ltd. patent are valid while others are not (Google LLC v. Blackberry Ltd., No. 19-1568, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 27973).

  • September 09, 2020

    Federal Circuit Upholds Denied Bid For New Trial In Patent Case

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a judgment entered Sept. 8, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals left intact a jury's verdict of infringement and an Illinois federal judge's final judgment of $4.2 million in damages in favor of a plaintiff who alleged that a competitor infringed a patented infant play gym (Kolcraft Enterprises Inc. v. Artsana USA Inc., No. 20-1102, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28402).

  • September 09, 2020

    Federal Circuit Revises Ruling In Patent Dispute Over Facebook Joinder

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In two orders and a revised opinion issued Sept. 4, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals granted panel rehearing in a case involving the requirements for joinder in an inter partes review (IPR) (Facebook Inc. v. Windy City Innovations LLC, Nos. 2018-1400, -1401, -1402, -1403, -1537, -1540, -1541, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 28259).

  • September 04, 2020

    Pharma Company Tells High Court Petitioner Not Entitled To Invoke Arthrex

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A generic drug manufacturer that prevailed in both an inter partes review (IPR) of a competitor's patents and a subsequent Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling filed its opposition to the patent holder's petition for certiorari on Aug. 24, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm that Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH cannot challenge the IPR decision under the recent ruling in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc. because it failed to raise the issue in a timely manner (Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., No. 19-1451, U.S. Sup.).

  • September 04, 2020

    In Reply Brief, Patent Owner Disputes Cellular Companies' License Claims

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The owner of a patent directed to an "aspect" of the LTE wireless communication standard in an Aug. 20 reply brief maintains to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that it should reject arguments by Motorola Mobility LLC, Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. and others that because LTE is a subsequent generation standard to code-division multiple access (CDMA), devices that support LTE are subsequent generation products to a 1993 CDMA Agreement (Evolved Wireless LLC v. HTC Corporation, et al., Nos. 20-1335, -1337, -1339, -1340, -1363, Fed. Cir.).

  • September 03, 2020

    Parties, Government Ask High Court To Hear USPTO Judge Appointments Clause Case

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. government and the companies involved in two underlying patent infringement cases have briefed the U.S. Supreme Court on questions presented in four related petitions for certiorari pertaining to whether the appointment of administrative patent judges (APJs) to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) by the secretary of Commerce is a violation of the appointments clause of the U.S. Constitution (United States v. Arthrex Inc., et al., No. 19-1434, U.S. Sup.; Smith & Nephew Inc., et al. v. Arthrex Inc., et al., No. 19-1452, U.S. Sup.; Arthrex Inc., et al. v. Smith & Nephew Inc., et al., No. 19-1458, U.S. Sup.; Polaris Innovations Limited v. Kingston Technology Company Inc., et al., No. 19-1459, U.S. Sup.).

  • September 02, 2020

    Appellees Tell Federal Circuit To Dismiss Appeal, Citing Patent Owner Brief

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Because a July 22 appellant brief by a patent owner challenges just one of two independent grounds given by a Delaware federal judge in declaring the patent not infringed, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should waive Local Rule 27(f), Fed. Cir. R. 27(f), and partially dismiss the appeal, three appellees tell the court in an Aug. 31 reply (Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software Inc., et al., Nos. 2020-1700, -1725, Fed. Cir.).

  • September 02, 2020

    Panel:  Patent Owner Not Judicially Estopped From Re-Adding Inventor

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Aug. 28 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected findings by a federal judge in Massachusetts that a patent owner that petitioned the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) to remove one of 11 listed inventors is barred by the doctrine of judicial estoppel from relisting the inventor following a bench trial on inventorship (Egenera Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., Nos. 2019-2015, -2387, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 27447).