Filewrapper

Federal Circuit Addresses Subject Matter Jurisdiction in Patent-Related Cases

In Semiconductor Energy Lab. Co., Ltd. v. Yujiro Nagata, the Federal Circuit weighed in on federal subject matter jurisdiction and provided two important reminders: (1) Just because a cause of action originates from a patent, standards in the patent statute, or even from other patent litigation, it is the present cause of action and claims […]

Continue Reading →

Accent Packaging, Inc. v. Leggett & Platt, Inc.: Reminders on Claim Construction, Discovery Matters

In Accent Packaging, Inc. v. Leggett & Platt, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part the district court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement. Accent is the assignee of U.S. Patents 7,373,877 (the '877 patent) and 7,412,992 (the '992 patent). The patents are drawn to a wire tier device useful for […]

Continue Reading →

New and Useful – February 6, 2013

· In Allergan, Inc. v. Barr Labs the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the District of Delaware finding that Barr Laboratories, Inc. and Sandoz Inc. had infringed a patent owned by Allergen, Inc., and finding the patent-in-suit valid. Barr and Sandoz each filed abbreviated new drug applications (ANDA) for a generic version of the […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit Addresses Obviousness Rationales and Counterarguments

Recently, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in CW Zumbiel v. Kappos. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences’ (“BPAI”) finding that multiple claims in U.S. Patent No. 6,715,639 (“the ’639 patent”) were obvious and therefore invalid. The ’639 patent is directed to a “carton with an improved dispenser.” The carton […]

Continue Reading →

Another Billion Dollar Patent Verdict

Another billion dollar verdict has been handed out in a patent case. Read the verdict in Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group, LTD. here. This latest case continues a string of billion dollar verdicts highlighted by Jonathan Kennedy in the latest edition of MVS Briefs. Carnegie Mellon brought suit alleging infringement of two of […]

Continue Reading →

After-the-fact Patent Assignment Too Late to Save Jurisdiction

A patent assignment that was prepared after a patent infringement law suit was commenced was too late to save jurisdiction the Federal Circuit held in Abraxis Bioscience, Inc. v. Navinta LLC. Because the plaintiff did not obtain ownership of the patents at issue until after the lawsuit was commenced, the plaintiff lacked standing at the […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO proposes tiered system for patent application examination speed

In a press release today, the USPTO has proposed a tiered examination system where applicants could choose to pay a higher fee in exchange for quicker examination of an application or could opt for a delay of up to 30 months before docketing for examination. This is the latest in Director Kappos' attempts to control […]

Continue Reading →

Claim and continuation rules dead: thousands of practitioners breathe easier

In a Federal Register notice today, the USPTO has officially withdrawn the claim and continuation rule changes from the Code of Federal Regulations. This is consistent with a press release from Thursday announcing the rules were no longer going to be pursued. The summary of the notice: The United States Patent and Trademark Office (Office) […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO announces e-Office Action program for patent applications

In a press release, the USPTO announced the availability of the e-Office Action program for patent applications. Under the program, applicants or attorneys may sign up to receive an email notice when an office action is mailed in an application, and can then download the office action from Private PAIR. This avoids the time delay […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up