Today, the Federal Circuit held a patent was anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) by another patent earlier in the patent-in-suit's priority chain. The court held the district court erred in finding that the patent at issue was entitled to a priority date of the earlier-filed patent, leading to the district court's improper conclusion that […]
Continue Reading →In a decision yesterday, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court's finding that the mark "Perfumebay" was likely to be confused with eBay, and affirmed an injunction barring the use of the domains perfumebay.com and perfume-bay.com (as of today, both these domains are still functional). The court also affirmed the finding that the use of […]
Continue Reading →In a decision Friday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's claim construction, but reversed its rulings regarding the sufficiency of notice of infringement and the applicability of the doctrine of equivalents. Regarding sufficiency of notice under 35 U.S.C. 287(a), the court held that while the patentee did not mark its products, its notice of […]
Continue Reading →In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit addressed when a case may be considered "exceptional" under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and therefore potentially warrant an award of attorney fees. The plaintiff purchased rights to a patent "as is" from a company going through bankruptcy. However, it was later revealed that the company did not have […]
Continue Reading →All in all, the order granting Glaxo's motion for a preliminary injunction barring enforcement of the USPTO's new claim and continuation limit rules is about everything Glaxo (and patent prosecutors) could have hoped for. The court found that each of the four factors considered when deciding whether to grant an injunction favored Glaxo, although the […]
Continue Reading →In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit reversed a decision of the U.S. International Trade Commission that a violation of § 337 of the 1930 Tarriff Act had not occurred. The court reversed the ITC's claim construction, and based on the revised claim construction, found the accused products infringed. This modified claim construction also resulted […]
Continue Reading →According to reports, enforcement of the USPTO's new claim and continuation limit rules has been enjoined. Judge James C. Cacheris issued the ruling from the bench after the hearing today on GlaxoSmithKline's motion for preliminary injunction. We'll have more as it develops, including any orders or decisions issued by the court. Update: More detail regarding […]
Continue Reading →The court's opinion enjoining the USPTO's new continuation and claim limit rules has been released. We'll have more once we've had a chance to analyze the court's reasoning. Update: click here for our post with more detailed analysis. Opinion granting preliminary injunction The AIPLA, who joined the case as an amicus supporting Glaxo, provides this […]
Continue Reading →Today at 10:00 AM Eastern time, Judge James C. Cacheris in the Eastern District of Virginia will hear GlaxoSmithKline's motion for preliminary injunction to prevent enforcement of the USPTO's new claim and continuation limit rules. No word on how long the hearing will last, but we'll post as soon as we hear of a ruling. […]
Continue Reading →In a precedential order today, the Federal Circuit denied a petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc in Biotechnology Industry Organization vs. District of Columbia. On August 3, the court held that the Prescription Drug Excessive Pricing Act of 2005 enacted by the District of Columbia City Council, which prohibited a patented drug from being […]
Continue Reading →Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.
Sign Up