We use cookies on this site to enable your digital experience. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our cookie policy. close

Mealey's Patents

  • November 20, 2018

    Federal Circuit Affirms: Patents Not Anticipated, But Damage Award Excessive

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 19 found that “although a close question,” a California federal judge did not err in denying a defendant judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) with regard to induced patent infringement (Enplas Display Device Corporation v. Seoul Semiconductor Company, No. 16-2599, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32625).

  • November 20, 2018

    Citing SAS, Federal Circuit Partly Vacates, Remands To Patent Board

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Palo Alto Networks Inc. on Nov. 19 partly prevailed before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in its consolidated appeal of two inter partes reviews (IPRs) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Palo Alto Networks Inc. v. Finjan Inc., Nos. 2017-2314, -2315, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32624).

  • November 19, 2018

    Mixer ‘Splash Shield’ Patent Not Obvious, Federal Circuit Affirms

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that confirmed the patentability of a claimed rinseable “splash shield” for mixers and blenders was affirmed Nov. 16 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Hamilton Beach Brands Inc. v. f’real! Foods LLC, No. 18-1274, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32432).

  • November 19, 2018

    Federal Circuit Finds Material Differences In Accused Steel Sheets

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 14 unsealed a Nov. 5 ruling that a Delaware federal judge erred in deeming a plaintiff collaterally estopped from bringing a patent infringement action (ArcelorMittal and ArcelorMittal Atlantique et Lorraine v. AK Steel Corporation, No. 17-1637, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32232).

  • November 19, 2018

    Divided Federal Circuit Rules Against Amazon, Upholds Patent Board

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in construing a disputed claim term as it appears in a communications decryption patent, nor in rejecting allegations of anticipation and obviousness by Amazon.com Inc. in an inter partes review (IPR), a panel majority of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Nov. 16 (ZitoVault LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., No. 17-2147, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32431).

  • November 19, 2018

    Patent Owner Prevails In Appeal Of Section 101 Ruling To Federal Circuit

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Washington federal judge’s determination of patent ineligibility under Section 101 of the Patent Act was reversed and remanded Nov. 16 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Ancora Technologies Inc. v. HTC America Inc., et al., No. 18-1404, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32433).

  • November 16, 2018

    Tribe, Drugmaker Heading To Supreme Court After Bids For Rehearing, Stay Denied

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Native American tribe and a drug company are taking their fight to use the tribe’s sovereign immunity to shield it from inter partes review (IPR) of patents to the U.S. Supreme Court, though the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 13 said it will not stay its opinion affirming the ruling while a certiorari petition runs its course (Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., Nos. 2018-1638, -1639, -1640, -1641, -1642, -1643, Fed. Cir.).

  • November 15, 2018

    Mandamus Granted By Federal Circuit; Transfer Or Dismissal Ordered

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its second request for mandamus, a petitioner prevailed Nov. 14 when the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals directed a New York federal judge to either dismiss or transfer a patent infringement action in view of In re:  Micron Technology, Inc. (In re:  Oath Holdings Inc., No. 18-157, Fed. Cir.).

  • November 15, 2018

    Board Declares 2 Claims Of Endoscope Hemostasis Patent Obvious

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A petitioner for inter partes review (IPR) persuaded the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Nov. 14 that two claims of a patented device and method for causing hemostasis of blood vessels through the use of an endoscope clip would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (Cook Group Inc. v. Boston Scientific Scimed Inc., No. IPR2017-00132, PTAB).

  • November 15, 2018

    Board Determination Of Patentability Vacated, Remanded By Panel

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Facebook Inc. and its subsidiary WhatsApp Inc. on Nov. 14 prevailed before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which agreed that a rejection by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of their allegations of patent obviousness was error (WhatsApp Inc., et al. v. TriPlay Inc., Nos. 17-2549, -2551, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 32198).

  • November 14, 2018

    Biogen Defends Patent In Response To Petition For Inter Partes Review

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Contrary to assertions by a petitioner for inter partes review (IPR), a patented regimen for treatment of low-grade, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is not obvious, patent owner Biogen Inc. maintains in a Nov. 13 response before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Pfizer Inc. v. Biogen Inc., No. IPR2018-00285, PTAB).

  • November 14, 2018

    Federal Magistrate Judge In Delaware Recommends Dismissal Of Patent Case

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware federal magistrate judge on Nov. 13 recommended that L’Oreal S.A. be dismissed from a patent infringement action because its ownership of a U.S. patent is insufficient to support the exercise of personal jurisdiction and because a plaintiff also failed to show that jurisdiction is proper under theories of agency and stream of commerce (University of Massachusetts Medical School, et al. v. L’Oreal S.A., et al., No. 17-868, D. Del., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 192832).

  • November 13, 2018

    Petition For Inter Partes Review Targets Technology In Self-Driving Vehicles

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Nov. 9 petition for inter partes review, a petitioner tells the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that nine claims of a patented system for calculating a desired speed for an autonomous, or self-driving, vehicle would have been obvious (SZ DGI Technology Ltd. v. Autel Robotics USA LLC, No. IPR2019-00250, PTAB).

  • November 13, 2018

    Intel Petitions Board For Review Of Qualcomm Noise Amplifier Patent

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent owned by Qualcomm Inc. relating to a low noise amplifier (LNA) within a radio frequency (RF) receiver configured to support carrier aggregation (CA) relies on components that “were well-established background knowledge for those of ordinary skill in the art well before” a claimed conception date, Intel Corp. asserts in a Nov. 9 petition for inter partes review (Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., No. IPR2019-00129, PTAB).

  • November 13, 2018

    Federal Circuit: Assignor Estoppel Not Available In Inter Partes Review

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A panel of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 9 upheld findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that Arista Networks Inc. is not barred by the doctrine of assignor estoppel from challenging the validity of a Cisco Systems Inc. patent because assignor estoppel is unavailable for assertion in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding (Arista Networks Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc., Nos. 17-1525, -1577, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31808).

  • November 13, 2018

    Delaware Federal Judge’s Obviousness Determination Disputed On Appeal

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Findings by a Delaware federal judge that a patented tampon applicator tip shape would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art are erroneous, the patent owner maintains in a new appeal to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Edgewell Personal Care Brands LLC v. Albaad Massuot Yitzhak Ltd., et al., No. 18-1890, Fed. Cir.).

  • November 13, 2018

    Inventors Tell Federal Circuit Patent Board Acted Improperly

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a recent appellant brief, a group of inventors assert that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred when it remanded their appeal of a rejected application on obviousness grounds to a patent examiner with a binding, new rejection of patent ineligibility (In re:  Glenn E. Riggs et al., No. 18-1883, Fed. Cir.).

  • November 12, 2018

    Federal Circuit Modifies Construction, Vacates Obviousness Findings

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Nov. 9 decision, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in finding no nexus between a patent owner’s claimed method for creating a minimally invasive operative corridor through tissue with significant neural structures and the patent owner’s commercial surgical technique, when assessing secondary considerations of nonobviousness (Nuvasive Inc. v. Andrei Iancu, Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 17-1666, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 31806).

  • November 12, 2018

    Indirect Infringement Claims Survive Dismissal In Maine Patent Case

    PORTLAND, Maine — Efforts by two defendants to obtain dismissal of allegations that they indirectly infringed a patented design for a flocked swab used to collect biological specimen samples were rejected Nov. 9 by a Maine federal judge (Copan Italia S.p.A., et al. v. Puritan Medical Products Company LLC, et al., No. 18-218, D. Maine, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191927).

  • November 9, 2018

    Pharmaceutical Firm Tells High Court Private Sale Did Not Violate On-Sale Bar

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A patent holder argues in a Nov. 8 merits reply brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), its private licensing agreement with a distributor did not trigger the on-sale date associated with the patent applications for its pharmaceutical products, asking the high court to reverse an appeals court’s finding of patent invalidity (Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al., No. 17-1229, U.S. Sup.).