Filewrapper-old

Is the Supreme Court Re-Aiming Markman?
October 17, 2014

    Post by Alex Christian The 1996 United States Supreme Court decision in Markman v. Westview Instruments established a landmark change for claim construction in patent infringement cases. That case established that the meaning of the claim language of a patent is a matter of law for a judge to decide, and not a matter of fact that should be determined by the jury. Since the decision, what is now known as a "C....... Read More


    USPTO Issues Report on Virtual Patent Marking Under the AIA
    October 01, 2014

      Among the provisions of the America Invents Act that went into effect on September 16, 2011 was a change to the patent marking provisions contained in 35 U.S.C. § 287(a). Marking an article as with a patent number provides constructive notice to the public that the article is patented, and failure to appropriately mark an article can preclude the recovery of damages for infringement until effective notice is....... Read More


      Legitimate Advocacy and Genuine Misrepresentation of Material Facts
      August 25, 2014

        The Federal Circuit has issued a decision inApotex Inc. v. UCB, Inc., upholding a district court's finding that Apotex's U.S. Patent No. 6,767,556 ("the '556 patent") is unenforceable due to inequitable conduct. Dr. Sherman, founder and chairman of Apotex, wrote the '556 patent application and is its sole inventor. The '556 is based on Canadian application filed on April 5, 2000........ Read More


        Critical Versus Optional, but Desireable Claim Elements
        August 18, 2014

          On August 6, 2014, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in ScriptPro, LLC v. Innovation Associates, Inc. In 2006, the Petitioner ScriptPro, LLC sued Innovation Associates, Inc. for infringement of claims 1, 2, 4, and 8 of U.S. Patent No. 6,910,601 ("the '601 patent"). The '601 patent describes a "collating unit" that uses sensors to automatically dispense and organiz....... Read More


          Federal Circuit Invalidates Patent Claims As Non-Patentable Subject Matter
          August 08, 2014

            The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's recent decision in Digitech Image Technologies v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc., upheld a decision that patent claims directed to a collection of numerical data that lacks a physical component or manifestation as well as an abstract idea of organizing data through mathematical correlations are invalid. The plaintiff, Digitech Image Technologies, filed in....... Read More


            Court of Federal Claims Confirms Payment of Maintenance Fees Still Required
            August 05, 2014

              A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Federal Claims ("CFC") has upheld the statutorily-mandated maintenance fees required by the USPTO in order to keep issued patents in force. The owner of an issued patent must pay maintenance fees to the USPTO three times during the lives of their issued patents to keep them in force: at three years and 6 months after grant, at seven years and 6 months after grant,....... Read More


              USPTO Patent Invalidation Precludes Judicial Equitable Remedies and Sanctions
              July 31, 2014

                The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued a decision inePlus, Inc. v. Lawson. ePlus sued Lawson asserting infringement of two patents—U.S. Patent Nos. 6,023,683 ("the '683 patent") and 6,505,172 ("the '172 patent"). At trial, the district court held two of ePlus's asserted system claims and three of ePlus's asserted method claims not invalid, and the jury found those same claims infringed by Law....... Read More


                USPTO Issues Preliminary Guidance on Patentability Based on Alice Corp.
                July 29, 2014

                  On June 25, 2014 the USPTO Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy released aMemorandum to the Patent Examining Corps that provides examiners with preliminary instructions related to subject matter eligibility of claims involving abstract ideas under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in view of the Supreme Court Decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International. The memo provides the following guidance wit....... Read More


                  Federal Circuit Weighs in on Stays for Post-Grant Review
                  July 24, 2014

                    The Federal Circuit has issued an opinion in VirtualAgility Inc. v. Salesforce.com, Inc., providing clarification regarding how court should properly determine whether to stay litigation during later-requested post-grant PTO proceedings. Under the America Invents Act, a district court is permitted, but not required, to grant such a stay. The statute also provides a list of four factors that the district court is t....... Read More


                    PTO Interference Decisions do not Preclude Invalidity Defenses in Court
                    July 23, 2014

                      The Federal Circuit has issued a decision in AbbVie v. Janssen Biotech and Centocor Biologics, which relates to patents that broadly cover antibodies which can neutralize activity of human interleukin 12 (IL-12) and have useful application in the treatment of autoimmune disorders. The patent owner, AbbVie, sued Janssen and Centocor for infringement of the patents at issue. At trial, the jury found that all of the ....... Read More


                        Newer Posts Older Posts  

                      Purpose

                      The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

                      Disclaimer

                      McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole

                      Connect with MVS

                      Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

                      Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

                      Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

                        I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.