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 →
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 →
Patent Owners Beware of Prior Adjudication Involving Related Patents By Joseph M. Hallman When patent claims are construed and interpreted in an adjudicative proceeding, such as patent infringement litigation in federal court or in an adjudicative proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), a preclusive effect can arise which can affect the validity of claims of related patents. For example, on December 8, 2022, in Google […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Vacates $2.75 Billion Ruling Against Cisco Because Judge’s Spouse Owned $5,000 of Cisco Stock By Julie L. Spieker Today, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a decision holding that Cisco willfully infringed several patents owned by Centripetal Networks, Inc. The District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia had awarded enhanced damages and royalties exceeding $2.75 billion to Centripetal. The Federal Circuit held that the district court judge was disqualified […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit dismisses another appeal by Apple Inc. By Joseph M. Hallman On November 10, 2021, in Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated (Apple v. Qualcomm), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) dismissed Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) consolidated appeal from four decisions made by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). The PTAB held that claims of patents owned by Qualcomm Incorporated (“Qualcomm”) […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit clarifies the “teaches away” doctrine and the “substantial evidence” requirement when making an obviousness determination By Joseph M. Hallman On July 22, 2021, in Chemours Company FC, LLC v. Daikin Industries, Ltd. (“Chemours v. Daikin”), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) reversed a decision made by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). In two inter partes reviews (“IPRs”) filed by Daikin Industries, Ltd. (“Daikin”), the PTAB held […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit reiterates the principle that when a § 103 rejection is based on a single prior art reference, the reference must be self-enabling in order to render the claimed invention obvious By Joseph M. Hallman On April 16, 2021, in Raytheon Technologies Corp. v. General Electric Co., the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) reversed a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) regarding unpatentability due to obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. In its decision, the Federal Circuit made clear that when […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Judge Evan Wallach Taking Senior Status By Gregory Lars Gunnerson Seat 9 of the Federal Circuit is being vacated by Judge Evan Wallach, who was appointed by President Barack Obama and will take senior status. President Joe Biden will thus be tasked with nominating the seat’s next holder. The seat will be officially vacated on May 31, 2021. The last seat to open up on […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Revives SynQor Patent By Julie L. Spieker On February 22, 2021, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision that SynQor’s US Patent No. 7,072,190 was unpatentable. SynQor’s ‘190 patent relates to technology that converts DC current from one voltage to another for use in large computer systems and data communication equipment. […] Continue Reading →
Has the Federal Circuit Made It Nearly Impossible to Maintain Genus Claims? By Blog Staff A recent denial by the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) to hear an appeal by Merck’s Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC (Idenix), leaves unanswered questions regarding the overall validity of genus claims, particularly within the biopharma field. The SCOTUS denied a petition for writ of certiorari to clarify certain Section 112 requirements with respect to […] Continue Reading →