WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Oct. 18 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in failing to weigh a patent owner’s objective evidence of nonobviousness (LiquidPower Specialty Products Inc. v. Baker Hughes, A GE Company LLC, No. 18-1141, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 29240).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Seven claims of a patent relating to a multidirectional alpine ski binding release mechanism were deemed unpatentable by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an Oct. 15 final written decision (Marker Volkl USA Inc. v. Kneebinding Inc., No. IPR2017-01265, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent relating to navigating electronic data via spoken natural language requests will be the subject of an upcoming inter partes review (IPR), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board revealed Oct. 15 (Microsoft Corp. v. IPA Technologies Inc., No. IPR2018-00794, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its Oct. 15 orders list, the U.S. Supreme Court said it will not review a November 2017 finding of patent ineligibility by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in a decision a petitioner-patent owner called “inconsistent, incoherent and increasingly unmoored” from the text of Section 101 of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Two-Way Media Ltd. v. Comcast Cable Communications LLC, et al., No. 18-124, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A panel of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 12 upheld findings by U.S. Judge Gregory M. Sleet of the District of Delaware that four patents covering thrice-weekly injections of 40mg glatiramer acetate (GA) do not pass muster under Section 103 of The Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 103 (Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al. v. Sandoz Inc., et al., No. 17-1575, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 28751).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — On the same day it affirmed a Delaware federal judge’s determination of invalidity with regard to four patents covering the multiple sclerosis drug Copaxone, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Oct. 12 also upheld an identical conclusion reached by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board with regard to three of the same patents, but based upon different prior art (Yeda Research and Development Co. Ltd. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al., Nos. 2017-1594, -1595, -1596, Fed. Cir.. 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 28750).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an Oct. 5 petition for inter partes review (IPR), social media giant Facebook Inc. tells the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a patented visual index for a graphical search engine would be obvious to a person of skill in the art (Facebook Inc. v. Hyper Search LLC, No. IPR2019-00041, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Operators of several fantasy sports websites prevailed Oct. 4 when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board agreed that eight claims of a video game system patent would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (Fanduel Inc., et al. v. CG Technology Development LLC, No. IPR2017-00902, PTAB).
SAN DIEGO — Finding that Apple Inc. did not satisfy the requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 502(b) in its quest to claw back documents that were inadvertently submitted during discovery in a lawsuit with Qualcomm Inc. over cellphone technology royalties, a California federal magistrate judge on Oct. 2 ruled that any privilege in the documents was waived and ordered Apple to resubmit them (In re: Qualcomm Litigation, No. 3:17-cv-00108, S.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an Oct. 9 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals agreed with a California federal judge that a patent directed to a method of detecting an antibiotic-resistant form of tuberculosis in human deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) is invalid (Roche Molecular Systems Inc. v. Cepheid, No. 17-1690, Fed. Cir., 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 28411).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The same day that Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. filed its respondent brief in a U.S. Supreme Court dispute over what triggers the on-sale bar in the patent application process, the high court in its Oct. 9 order list granted the U.S. Department of Justice’s petition to participate in upcoming Dec. 4 oral arguments as amicus curiae (Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc., et al., No. 17-1229, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court announced Oct. 9 that it will not review a January 2018 summary affirmance by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals of a Florida judge’s determination that federal jurisdiction exists over a state law breach of contract claim stemming from royalties allegedly owed under a patent license (Alexsam Inc. v. Wildcard Systems Inc., No. 17-1483, U.S. Sup.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A declaratory judgment action by Intel Corp. asserting that two patents relating to semiconductor technology are unenforceable survived a motion to dismiss Oct. 5, when a California federal judge found the existence of an “actual case or controversy” (Intel Corp. v. Tela Innovations Inc., No. 18-2848, N.D. Calif., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172770).
SALT LAKE CITY — In an Oct. 5 ruling, a Utah federal magistrate judge found that Microsoft Corp.’s telemetry usage data related to the life preview feature in its Microsoft Office line of software products is discoverable in a patent infringement case because it is directly relevant to the claimed infringement and damages, granting the plaintiff’s motion to compel while mostly denying Microsoft’s motion for a protective order (Corel Software LLC v. Microsoft Corp., No. 15-528, D. Utah, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 172875).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent issued in January to the University of Chicago covers “nearly limitless scope,” a microbiome research and development company asserts in an Oct. 2 petition for post-grant review (PGR) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Genome & Company v. University of Chicago, PGR2019-00002, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a final written decision issued Oct. 4, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board agreed with an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner that six claims of a patented method of treating B-cell lymphomas, including non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), would have been anticipated by or obvious to a person of skill in the art (Celltrion Inc. v. Biogen Inc., No. IPR2017-01095, PTAB).
WILMINGTON, Del. — In an Oct. 4 order, a Delaware federal judge found that the U.S. Supreme Court’s holding in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., 138 S. Ct. 2129 (2018), (WesternGeco II) implicitly overruled a 2013 Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals decision that damages based on worldwide sales are unavailable in an infringement action, but certified the matter for interlocutory appeal because the Federal Circuit “could well disagree with this Court’s assessment” (Power Integrations v. Fairchild Semiconductor Int’l Inc., No. 04-1371, D. Del., 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 171699).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Sept. 18 appellant brief, an infringement defendant maintains before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a patent relating to wirelessly transmitting information about garage door openers does not pass muster under Section 101 of the Patent Act (The Chamberlain Group Inc. v. Techtronic Industries North America Inc., et al., No. 18-2103, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an Oct. 3 petition for inter partes review by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Apple Inc. argues that claimed concepts in a lens assembly with a plurality of refractive lens elements were well known in the art before the July 2013 priority date of a patent (Apple Inc. v. Corephotonics Ltd., No. IPR2019-00030, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A patent infringement defendant recently told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a Delaware federal judge erred in confirming as valid a single claim of a patent relating to the peptide icatibant because “under a correct application” of the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting (ODP), the claim is invalid (Shire Orphan Therapies LLC, v. Fresenius Kabi USA LLC, No. 18-2124, Fed. Cir.).