The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeals 2019-1169, -1260 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020), is remarkable.

The Office pointed to the drafting history of the petitioner estoppel provision to support its views.

In a split opinion in Homeland Housewares, LLC v. Whirlpool Corporation, the Federal Circuit has again overturned a final written decision issued by the PTAB determining that challenged claims...

In Matthews International Corporation v. Vandor Corporation, No. 2017-1889 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 27, 2018) (non-precedential), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's final written decision to uphold the claims...

In a case involving online gaming, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision that 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) did not bar instituting an IPR where the patent owner failed to preserve its arguments that service was perfected.

The Supreme Court held on April 24, 2018 that if the Patent Office institutes and IPR proceeding, it must issue a final written decision with respect to the patentability of every patent claim challenged by the petitioner.

The Federal Circuit recently addressed the interplay between the statutory patent term extension (PTE) and the non-statutory doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting (ODP).

The decision is important to those served with an infringement complaint that is later dismissed without prejudice.

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...

Since the Federal Circuit's 2018 en banc decision in Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corporation, (discussed here) the court has reviewed a number...

In Vanda Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. West-Ward Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., Nos. 2016-2707, 2016-2708 (Fed. Cir. April 13, 2018), the court held that claims to methods of treatment were patent eligible.

In Qualcomm, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., No. 20-1558 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 1, 2022), the Federal Circuit concluded that a patentee's admissions concerning the content of the prior art, contained in the specification of the challenged patent.

Updated Bayh-Dole Act regulations are effective today (May 14, 2018). Here are the key steps federal funding recipients will want to take to comply with the new rule and those licensing federally funded technology will want to know.

In NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 2016-1794 (Fed. Cir. Jul. 27, 2018) (en banc), the Federal Circuit decided en banc that attorneys' fees are not "expenses" required to be paid by an applicant who appeals ...

In the realm of intellectual property and innovation, a new frontier is emerging—one that is deeply intertwined with the urgent need for environmental stewardship and sustainability.

In Knowles Electronics LLC v. Cirrus Logic, Inc., No. 2016-2010 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 1, 2018), the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB decision that upheld an examiner's rejection of claims...

Collateral estoppel is a resource-saving shortcut. Judges consider it when an issue previously received sufficient judicial attention. And they apply it when the issue was resolved...

A glimpse into the future is possible by reviewing ICON's recent patent filings. The construction technology company was recently awarded a nearly $60-million NASA...

Serial IPR petitions directed to previously-challenged patents account for many of the petitions filed with the PTAB; however, 35 U.S.C. § 325(d) provides the Board with discretion to reject petitions...

Recently updated statistics from the USPTO provide little comfort for patent owners seeking to amend claims during an IPR proceeding.