The America Invents Act permits a party to challenge a patent (a “petitioner”) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) via an inter partes review (an “IPR”). However, the AIA provides that such a review [...]
The America Invents Act of 2011 overhauled the U.S. Patent system and established three types of administrative review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that enable a “person’ other than the patent owner to [...]
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released revised guidance (Section 101 Revised Guidance) for use by USPTO personnel in evaluating subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, effective January 7, 2019. The Guidance [...]
The USPTO issued a notice in the Federal Register regarding the options for amendments by a patent owner to their patent through reissue or reexamination. The notice reminds patent owners that various options exist for a [...]
UNDERSTANDING 35 U.S.C. § 101 AND THE ALICE DECISION Overview Section 101 sets forth the type of inventions which are entitled to be patented (assuming they meet the other requirements for patentability, such as novelty (under [...]
In the case of Helsinn Healthcare S.A., v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al., the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that changes to Section 102 of the America Invents Act did not change the meaning of the [...]
The USPTO has issued modified subject-matter eligibility (“Section 101”) guidance. The new guidance recognizes the need for increased clarity and consistency in how Section 101 is applied. Under current Section 101 case law, an invention may not [...]
In the case of Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc. (Federal Circuit, November 9, 2018), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the issue of whether assignee estoppel applies to prevent an inventor/assignor from [...]
In the case of WesternGeco Ltd. v. Ion Geophysical Corp., the U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s rule against extraterritorial lost profits for infringement of U.S. Patents. The Supreme Court ruled that 35 U.S.C. § 271(f), [...]
In a close 5-4 decision in SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, the Supreme Court found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s previous practice of agreeing to review some challenged claims and deny review of others in [...]
