-
Read more: Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
A published patent application is prior art in an IPR proceeding as of the application’s filing date. Therefore, a reference may be prior art for the purposes of an IPR even if it was published after the priority date of the patent being reviewed.
-
Read more: BearBox LLC v. Lancium LLC
The determination of whether federal patent law preempts a state law cause of action is based on the state law claim as pled, not on a comparison of the required elements of the state law claim to the objectives embodied by federal patent law.
-
Read more: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Torrent Pharma Inc.
Written description and enablement analysis should focus on what is claimed in the patent. For enablement, later-existing state of the art cannot be used to invalidate a patent that was enabled for what was claimed at the time of filing.
-
Read more: CeramTec GMBH v. CoorsTek Bioceramics LLC
The doctrine of unclean hands may be used as an affirmative defense in a trademark functionality proceeding. However, the TTAB may exercise its discretion to refuse this defense in view of the public policy interest of cancelling ineligible trademarks.
-
Read more: Honeywell International Inc. v. 3G Licensing, S.A.
A proposed modification or combination of prior art references does not have to be the most desired or the most favorable to provide the proper motivation to modify or combine the references to show obviousness.
-
Read more: Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. v. Amneal Pharmaceuticals of New York, LLC
To list a patent in the Orange Book as covering a product that is the subject of an NDA, the patent must claim the active ingredient drug for which the NDA was submitted and approved.
-
Read more: CloudofChange, LLC v. NCR Corporation
Proving vicarious liability of a system claim requires showing that a first party directed or controlled a second party’s use of the system as a whole, not just a portion of the system.
-
Read more: Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, LLC
When a determination of whether there is a motivation to combine references to show obviousness is necessary, the analysis requires specificity and adequate explanation.
Want updates when we have new case summaries? Enter your email below to subscribe!