700 results found

Artificial intelligence (AI) is stepping out of science fiction and into our everyday lives at a rapid pace.

In Certain Network Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-945, Commission Opinion at 12 - 13 (U.S.I.T.C. Aug. 16, 2017), the International Trade Commission wrote that ‘‘The Federal Circuit has explained that a finding of invalidity by a federal district court has immediate preclusive effects upon the continued vitality of Commission remedial orders . . . .

On October 9, 2018, in Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. v. Cepheid, the Federal Circuit upheld a district court decision that claims reciting nucleotide primers in U.S. Patent No. 5,643,723...

Much has been written lately about the USPTO's recent enforcement of its controversial interpretation of filing Requests for Continued Examination (RCE) in National Stage applications...

On September 25, 2024, in Ex parte Sim, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) overturned the obviousness position of primary examiner, John Chu...

In its recent decision, the PTAB ("the Board") determined that all challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,301,638 B2 were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 328(a) for lack of written description and lack of enablement.

The title above refers to a lyric from a 1998 song by Eve 6, although they used the word "cabinet" instead of "chair."

They are structurally identical to the ends of DNA strands found in nature." Id. at 10-11

In a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision issued on April 16, 2021, in Ex parte Bhalla, Luthra, Reid I, and Levason (Appeal 2021-001535, USSN 14/373,413).

This is a consolidated appeal from two Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("Board") decisions in inter partes reviews ("IPRs") of U.S. Patent 8,679,487 ("the '487 patent"),...

In the matter of Ex parte HAN LIU, et al., the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determined on August 17, 2023, that an examiner (Sarah al-Awadi, supported by Supervisory Patent Examiners...

On July 10, 2023, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reversed an examiner's finding of obvious on the basis of a failure to show a motivation to modify the prior art...

La fabrication, l'utilisation et la vente aux États-Unis d'un produit couvert par un brevet américain, sans l'autorisation du breveté, constitue une contrefaçon de ce brevet.

As noted in an earlier post on this blog (Using AI to Track AI Patents at the USPTO), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) continues to see tremendous growth in the area of...

The authors suggest that In re Cray and TC Heartland have notable venue implications for patent infringement actions against sharing economy participants like Uber and Airbnb.

The authors suggest that whether TC Heartland applies to BPCIA actions is an open question given the statutory and policy differences between 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) and the BCPIA.

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision denying an inter partes review petition against FaceTec, Inc.'s facial recognition authentication patent, finding that the petitioner failed to demonstrate adequate motivation to combine prior art references. The decision centered on whether perspective distortion techniques could be used to verify three-dimensionality in facial authentication systems, with the PTAB determining that the cited prior art did not teach the claimed verific