The Patent Office issued Honeywell a patent that required correction. The patent, according to Honeywell, did not include the proper...

In a recent decision vacating the PTAB's finding that a draft standard for video coding emailed to a listserv was not publicly accessible.

I am excited to announce the publication of the Intellectual Property Owner (IPO)'s white paper on "Protecting Inventions Relating to Artificial Intelligence: Best Practices."

The STRONGER (Support Technology & Research for Our Nation's Growth and Economic Resilience) Patents Act of 2017 was recently introduced in the Senate.

Two recent Federal Circuit decisions illustrate how an error in construing claims may lead the court to reverse a PTAB final written decision.

A few months ago, in BTG International Ltd. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC, the Federal Circuit invited the Patent Office's views on the scope of the petitioner estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2).

In Phigenix, Inc. v. ImmunoGen, Inc., the Federal Circuit dismissed, for lack of standing under Article III of the Constitution, a petitioner-appellant's appeal of a PTAB final written decision that refused to cancel claims challenged in an IPR.

The Federal Circuit overturned PTAB precedent that broadly allowed joinder under 35 U.S.C. § 315(c).

In early February 2023, the Patent Office's Director designated as precedential the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's decision in Xerox Corp. v. Bytemark, Inc., IPR2022-00624...

The Patent Office's Director recently notified the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC) of the Office's intent to set or adjust several fees that patent applicants, patent owners...

Fighting a war on two fronts is rarely an enviable strategic position. While district court judges do not always grant stays of patent infringement cases until resolution ...

In an earlier article, we compared the sufficiency of disclosure for Artificial Intelligence (AI) patents in the U.S. and the European Patent Office (EPO)

Inter partes review (IPR) is a procedure that allows a party to challenge the validity of an issued patent based on prior art patents or printed publications.

The US Patent and Trademark Office's Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program allows inventors, companies, universities, and other non-profit entities to accelerate the patent examination...

Over a thorough dissent by Judge O'Malley, the Federal Circuit determined it lacked jurisdiction to review the Board's decision to institute IPR despite an arbitration agreement between the parties.

The Board's recent decision in Veeam Software Corp. v. Veritas Technologies, LLC, Case No. IPR2014-00090 (PTAB July 17, 2017), provides patent practitioners with a framework for analyzing proposed substitute claims.

Monsanto Technology LLC v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. Appeal 2017-1032 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 5, 2018), illustrates "[t]he life of a patent solicitor has always been a hard one."

After the Supreme Court's decision in United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Patent Office implemented an interim process for the Director to review Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions in AIA trials.

In ClearOne, Inc. v. Shure Acquisition Holdings, Inc., Appeal 2021-1517, Slip Op. at 2 (Fed. Cir. June 1, 2022), the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board order that refused to authorize...

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)'s innovative Climate Change Mitigation Pilot Program makes 2024 the prime time for those creating climate-friendly...