Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Patents

  • July 09, 2020

    Patent Specification Lacks Sufficient Structure, Federal Circuit Finds

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 8 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed in part a Texas federal judge’s determination of patent indefiniteness, but for a different reason than that relied on by the district court (Via Vadis LLC, et al. v. Blizzard Entertainment Inc., et al., Nos. 19-2269, -2270, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 21200).

  • July 09, 2020

    Panel Affirms: Weight Loss Patent Application Covers Abstract Idea

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on July 8 upheld findings by a patent examiner, and later the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, that a claimed method of achieving weight loss by using hunger as a feedback mechanism recites patent-ineligible subject matter (In re:  Zunshine, No. 20-1254, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 21201).

  • July 08, 2020

    Denial Of Fees In Patent Case Vacated; Panel Says Wrong Statute Applied

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Florida federal judge’s application of the trademark statute in assessing a request for an award of attorney fees in a patent case was an abuse of discretion, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled July 1, reversing and remanding (Electronic Communication Technologies LLC v. ShoppersChoice.com LLC, No. 19-2087, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 20504).

  • July 08, 2020

    Federal Circuit Extends Arthrex, VirnetX Rationale To Ex Parte Proceedings

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a precedential order issued July 7, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals wrote that it can find “no principled reason to depart” from the remedy proscribed in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., 941 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2019), and VirnetX Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 2019-1671, (Fed. Cir. May 13, 2020), when assessing a constitutional challenge to the makeup of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board panel in an ex parte proceeding (In re: Boloro Global Limited, No. 19-2349, Fed. Cir.).

  • July 06, 2020

    Panel Agrees:  Cardiac Arrythmia Monitoring Technology Not Patentable

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 1 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld findings by a federal judge in Massachusetts that various claims of two patents directed to mobile cardiac telemetry (MCT) are ineligible for patenting (CardioNet LLC, et al. v. InfoBionic Inc., No. 20-1018, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 20632).

  • July 06, 2020

    Patent Owner Fails In Challenge Of Board Obviousness Holding

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a July 2 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a determination by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that various claims of a data capacity management patent are obvious, while dismissing as moot the patent owner’s appeal in two other inter partes reviews (IPRs) (Sound View Innovations LLC v. Hulu LLC, et al., Nos. 2019-1865, -1867, Fed. Cir.).

  • July 01, 2020

    In Cross-Appeal, Patent Owner Disputes Board Anticipation Holding

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred when it determined that an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner established by a preponderance of the evidence that five claims of a valve assembly patent are anticipated by a German patent application, a cross-appellant told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals June 15 (Power-Packer North America Inc., d/b/a Gits Manufacturing Co. v. G.W. Lisk Co. Inc., Nos. 2020-1250, -1323, Fed. Cir.).

  • July 01, 2020

    Gaming ‘Bonus Feature’ Patent Claims Wrongly Canceled, Owner Says

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 22 appellant brief, an inventor defended as patentable his “novel bonus feature for a card game,” while also levying a constitutional challenge to the covered business method (CBM) review procedure administered by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) (New Vision Gaming and Development Inc. v. SG Gaming Inc., No. 20-1399, Fed. Cir.).

  • July 01, 2020

    Juniper Tells Board Interference Reducing Patent Is Obvious

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 30 petition for inter partes review (IPR), Juniper Networks Inc. asserts that a patented “phase cancellation” method for reducing wireless signal interference is not patentable (Juniper Networks Inc. v. American Patents LLC, No. IPR2020-01115, PTAB).

  • July 01, 2020

    Panel Confirms:  Aircraft Lavatory-Related Patents Are Obvious

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Without reaching the question of whether the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in allowing an expert to rely on nonpublic documents to support his opinion of unpatentability, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 26 upheld the board’s cancellation of various claims of two aircraft lavatory-related patents (B/E Aerospace Inc. v. C&D Zodiac Inc., Nos. 2019-1935,  Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 19886).

  • July 01, 2020

    In New Petition By Nintendo, Gaming Controller Targeted

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Citing a recent final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that canceled all challenged claims of a gaming controller patent, Nintendo Of America Inc. on June 26 told the board that it should also cancel a related patent that “claims effectively the same” invention (Nintendo Of America Inc. v. Gamevice Inc., No. IPR2020-01179, PTAB).

  • June 30, 2020

    Comcast Persuades Board To Cancel Challenged Claims Of Rovi Patent

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 29 final written decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board agreed with Comcast Cable Communications LLC that 28 claims of an on-demand media delivery patent should be canceled (Comcast Cable Communications LLC v. Rovi Guides Inc., No. IPR2019-00299, PTAB).

  • June 26, 2020

    Microsoft Petition Should Be Denied, Patent Owner Tells Board

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — The creators of the “HandlePa” selfie stick defended their invention as patentable in a June 18 filing with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Microsoft Corp. v. Dareltech LLC, No. IPR2020-00483, PTAB).

  • June 25, 2020

    Cert Denied In Dispute Over Retroactive Inter Partes Review Application

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its June 22 orders list the U.S. Supreme Court revealed that it will not address a petitioner’s assertion that it is unconstitutional to subject patents issued before the establishment by Congress of the inter partes review (IPR) procedure to IPR (Collabo Innovations Inc. v. Sony Corp., No. 19-601, U.S. Sup.).

  • June 25, 2020

    Comcast Challenge To ITC Patent Authority Rejected By High Court

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A petition for certiorari by Comcast Corp. that questioned, among other things, the ability of the International Trade Commission (ITC) to determine whether accused cable set-top boxes infringe two since-expired patents was turned away June 22 by the U.S. Supreme Court (Comcast Corp., et al. v. International Trade Commission, et al., No. 19-1173, U.S. Sup.).

  • June 25, 2020

    With Denial Of Certiorari, ITC Determination Of Patent Infringement Stands

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — One week after denying certiorari in two cases that presented similar questions for review, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 22 rejected a third case involving the “tangential relation” exception to prosecution history estoppel (CJ CheilJedang Corp., CJ CheilJedang Corp., et al. v. International Trade Commission, et al., No. 19-1062, U.S. Sup.).

  • June 19, 2020

    Federal Circuit Upholds Board Determination Of Patent Obviousness

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Four final written decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that canceled as obvious various claims of two patents directed to networked shared, interactive applications — such as video games — were affirmed June 16 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (PalTalk Holdings Inc. v. Riot Games Inc., No. 19-2035, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 18897).

  • June 19, 2020

    Panel Affirms: Patent Owner Barred From Suing Amazon Customers

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A prior dismissal with prejudice of patent infringement allegations against Amazon.com Inc. serves to bar the patent owner from now suing Amazon’s customers, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled June 17, affirming a California federal judge’s grant of summary judgment in the cases (PersonalWeb Technologies LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., et al., No. 19-1918, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 18939).

  • June 18, 2020

    Panel Again Says Board Erred In Treatment Of Secondary Considerations

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 17 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred when it determined that a crude oil transport patent is obvious without considering the patent owner’s evidence of secondary considerations of nonobviousness (LiquidPower Specialty Products Inc. v. Baker Hughes, No. 19-1838, Fed. Cir., 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 19016).

  • June 17, 2020

    Contact Processing Method Would Have Been Obvious, Verizon Tells Board

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 16 request for inter partes review (IPR), a petitioner maintains that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board should cancel various claims of a patent that, among other things, discloses the display on a mobile device of contact icons in the form of “contact bubbles” that may be combined to form contact groups (Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. Huawei Device Co. Ltd., No. IPR2020-01117, PTAB).