Important to keep claim construction in mind when drafting a patent application By Joseph M. Hallman Claim construction, or how claim terms of a patent are understood, interpreted, and construed, is often a major factor in the outcome of a patent infringement lawsuit. Claim construction also can often be a highly contentious point of disagreement amongst parties in an infringement suit. The meaning of claim terms can often dictate the scope […] Continue Reading →
Apple’s Major Products Do Not Infringe Patents By Joseph M. Hallman On August 14, 2023, in One-E-Way, Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”), in a nonprecedential opinion, affirmed a decision by the Central District of California holding that several popular products sold by tech giant Apple do not infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 10,129,627 (“the ‘627 patent”) or 10,468,047 […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement in Cannabis Extraction Patent Dispute By Brian D. Keppler, Ph.D. In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a non-infringement ruling in a case involving Canopy Growth Corporation and GW Pharmaceuticals, two major players in the cannabis industry. At issue was Canopy’s U.S. Patent No. 10,870,632, which covers a method of extracting cannabinoids from cannabis using carbon dioxide (CO2) in liquefied form under subcritical pressure […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Affirms Intrinsic Evidence Trumps Extrinsic Evidence During Claim Construction By Joseph M. Hallman On October 13, 2020, in Immunex Corp. v. Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC, Genzyme Corp., and Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) affirmed-in-part and dismissed-in-part an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) holding that when it comes to claim construction, intrinsic evidence trumps extrinsic evidence. […] Continue Reading →
USPTO Director Andrei Lancu Takes a Look at Early Prosecution This week, the USPTO Director, Andrei Iancu, testified before the House Judiciary Committee. In his written statement Director Iancu wrote on topics related to early prosecution that would result in lower costs to clients and would speed up the process of obtaining a patent. A new pilot program that will allow for a pre-search Examiner […] Continue Reading →
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation is NOT Broadest Possible Interpretation In a decision by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals last week, In re Smith International, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“the Board”) decision affirming the Examiner’s rejections of some claims in an ex parte reexamination. The invention is directed to a downhole drilling tool for oil and gas […] Continue Reading →
Netlist v. Diablo Continues On July 25, 2017, the Federal Circuit released a nonprecedential opinion vacating the Board’s decisions and remanding for further proceedings because of erroneous construction of certain language. The Board had previously deemed claims 15-17, 22, 24, 26 and 31-33 of U.S. Patent No. 7,881,150 and claims 1, 16, 17, 24 and 30-31 of U.S. […] Continue Reading →
Court-Mandated Claim Limitation: The Complexity of Simplification Patent cases often present many complex issues because a given case can feature a patent portfolio where each patent within the portfolio has a high number of litigable claims. One way district courts have attempted to increase the efficiency of patent litigation is through court-mandated claim limitation. When a case involves multiple parties and multiple […] Continue Reading →
Court-Mandated Claim Limitation: The Complexity of Simplification Patent cases often present many complex issues because a given case can feature a patent portfolio where each patent within the portfolio has a high number of litigable claims. One way district courts have attempted to increase the efficiency of patent litigation is through court-mandated claim limitation. When a case involves multiple parties and multiple […] Continue Reading →
Court-Mandated Claim Limitation: The Complexity of Simplification Patent cases often present many complex issues because a given case can feature a patent portfolio where each patent within the portfolio has a high number of litigable claims. Parties filing a patent suit on the basis of a patent portfolio and/or a large number of claims should be aware and prepared to respond to […] Continue Reading →