Patent Litigation

Part One of a Two-Part Article Congress is empowered to create a patent system to promote the useful arts, and it has enacted laws to create a patent system that encourages innovation. Balancing that power, however, the courts in recent years have tried to rein in the scope of the patent right by limiting the scope of patent-eligible subject matter.

Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Does Not Invalidate Section 156 Patent Term Extension
Federal Circuit Holds Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in IPR Context
Federal Circuit Reverses District Court Holding of Patent Ineligibility of Computer Security Patent

How, if at all, can a non-injured party that challenges a patent before the PTAB and loses may then demonstrate Article III standing to appeal to the federal courts from the PTAB's decision upholding the patent's validity.

Beginning on Nov. 13, 2018, the USPTO will cease to apply the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard for newly-filed IPR, PGR, and CBM trials under the America Invents Act (AIA). Instead, the USPTO will begin "using the same claim construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action …."

Obviousness Determination Can Be Different for Apparatus and Method Claims
Petitioner “Bears the Burden” On Demonstrating Real Parties in Interest

The recent In Re Rembrandt Technologies decision is a reminder of both the potential consequence of a patent holder's disingenuous assertion of unintentionality and the challenges that defendants face when raising the improper filing of a petition to revive a lapsed patent as a defense.

A look at several unique trademark cases where the plaintiff fashion brand proactively sought to invalidate a competitor's non-traditional trademarks, an action which reflects a push back on increasingly aggressive litigation tactics by fashion brands seeking to blur the lines between a non-protectable fashion trend and a protectable trademark.

The USPTO announced revisions to PTAB procedures that formalize Andrei Iancu's control over the 250 administrative patent judges and their policy-making, while making that control more transparent.