University of Strathclyde v. Clear-Vu Lighting LLC, Appeal No. 2021-2243 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 4, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reversed an inter partes review decision finding claims directed to light-based disinfecting methods to be obvious over the prior art. This case provides a helpful example of how negative claim limitations can affect an obviousness determination ...
Uniloc USA, Inc. v. Motorola Mobility LLC, Appeal Nos 2021-1555, -1795 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 4, 2022) Our Case of the Week is ostensibly a case about whether a patent owner has standing to sue when that patent holder has granted an exclusive license. But the case turns on the application of collateral estoppel, when Uniloc, the patent owner, dismissed an appeal against Apple in an unrelated suit concerning the same facts. The case sounds like a cautionary tale about dismissing cases on appeal ...
Indivior UK Ltd. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories S.A., Appeal Nos. 2020-2073, -2142 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 24, 2021) Our Case of the Week this week focuses on the written description requirement when the patent claims a range. The Court addressed a circumstance where the application disclosed a number of values within a range, but did not disclose the range itself ...
American National Manufacturing Inc. v. Sleep Number Corporation, Appeal Nos. 2021-1321, -1323, -1379, -1382 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2022) In an appeal from inter partes review proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Federal Circuit, among other issues, addressed whether PTAB erred in allowing patent owner Sleep Number to amend challenged claims by adding changes that did not directly respond to challenges by petitioner American National ...
Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1683, -1763, -1764, 1827 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 10, 2021) Our Case of the Week reinforces a developing body of law concerning standing to appeal from an adverse PTAB decision in an IPR. This is the second such decision arising from a global settlement between Apple and Qualcomm this year. We wrote about the first case, in April this year, here ...
In re: Apple Inc., Appeal No. 2022-162 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 8, 2022) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit granted Apple’s petition for mandamus, directing the District Court for the Western District of Texas to vacate a scheduling order that would require Apple and counter-party Aire Technology Ltd ...
In re: Vivint, Inc., Appeal No. 2020-1992 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 29, 2021) In an appeal from the United States Patent Trial and Appeal Board, the Federal Circuit addressed whether a party may challenge the validity of an issued patent by ex parte reexamination when the challenger has repeatedly tried to use inter partes review (“IPR”) to forward the same argument. The Federal Circuit held that, when applying 35 U.S.C ...
ABC Corp. v. Tomoloo Official, Appeal Nos. 2021-2277, -2355, -2150 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 28, 2022) ABC Corp. v. eBay, Inc., Appeal No. 2022-1071 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 28, 2022) The following summary covers two decisions issued the same day, dealing with preliminary injunctions issued from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in a single litigation. In one of those decisions, the Federal Circuit examined the notice requirement under FRCP 65(a) and held it was not met ...
Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, Appeal No. 2020-1441 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered, and rejected, new constitutional challenges to the structure and funding of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”). Judge Newman concurred with the majority that the Board’s decision should be remanded for Director approval under United States v. Arthrex, Inc ...
Weisner v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2021-2228 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2022) In its only precedential patent case this last week, the Federal Circuit again revisited the thresholds for disposing of cases under Section 101, brought on a motion to dismiss. In a split decision, the Court affirmed the dismissal of two patents, but reversed the district court concerning two other patents, all of which shared the same specification ...
Kannuu Pty Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Appeal No. 2021-1638 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 7, 2021) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed whether a forum selection clause in an NDA may prohibit a party from petitioning for an inter partes review with the PTAB. Kannuu filed a motion for a preliminary injunction, asking the district court to compel Samsung to withdraw their petitions. The district court denied the motion, and Kannuu appealed ...
Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1828, -1867 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 28, 2021) The Federal Circuit issued two precedential decisions this week—both arising from IPRs filed by Intel against patents owned by Qualcomm. In our Case of the Week, we focus on the first of those cases. In our Also This Week section below, we cover the second case ...
Evolusion Concepts, Inc. v. HOC Events Inc., Appeal No. 2021-1963 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 14, 2022) In its only precedential patent case this week, the Federal Circuit disposed of an appeal, holding that the district court’s claim construction was wrong. In the appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the Federal Circuit addressed the meaning of the term “magazine catch bar” in the asserted claims ...
Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation v. Accord Healthcare, Inc., Appeal No. 2021-1070 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 3, 2022) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s bench trial finding that claims of a pharmaceutical patent were supported by adequate written description under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a) ...
In re: Juniper Networks, Inc., Appeal No. 2021-160 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 24, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit issued its fifth writ of mandamus this year ordering transfer of a patent case out of the Western District of Texas courtroom of U.S. District Court Judge Alan D. Albright. (Our write-up of the recent precedential decision in In re Samsung is available here ...
Omega Patents, LLC, v. CalAmp Corp., Appeal Nos. 2020-1793, -1794, (Fed. Cir. Sept. 14, 2021) In its only precedential patent case this week, the Federal Circuit sent a case back for a third trial on the issue of damages. This appeal comes after the second jury trial, in which Omega accused CalAmp of infringing claims of four of its patents. In the prior appeal and the instant appeal, the Court affirmed on the underlying issues of infringement and validity ...
In re: MaxPower Semiconductor, Inc., Appeal No. 2021-146 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 8, 2021) In its only precedential patent case this week, the Federal Circuit denied a mandamus petition relating to the PTAB’s institution of inter partes reviews of MaxPower’s patents. The case touches on, but does not completely resolve, whether the PTAB can institute inter partes reviews where the parties have agreed to arbitrate those disputes ...
Belcher Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal No. 2020-1799 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 1, 2021) In an appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that Belcher Pharmaceuticals, LLC (“Belcher”) engaged in inequitable conduct by withholding prior art from the Patent and Trademark Office (the “PTO”) during the prosecution of Belcher’s patent ...
Teva Pharms. Int’l GmbH v. Eli Lilly and Co., Appeal Nos. 2020-1747, -1748, -1750 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2021) Eli Lilly and Co. v. Teva Pharms. Int’l GmbH, Appeal Nos. 2020-1876, -1877, -1878 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 16, 2021) In this week’s Cases of the Week, the Federal Circuit reviewed ...
PersonalWeb Technologies LLC v. Google LLC, Appeal Nos. 2020-1543, -1553, -1554 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s judgment on the pleadings that the claims of three patents owned by appellant PersonalWeb were invalid as patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 ...
GlaxoSmithKline LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1976, -2023 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 5, 2021) Our Case of the Week this week is a re-write of our Case of the Week on October 5, 2020. The case involves a drug that could be used for multiple therapeutic purposes ...
Qualcomm Inc. v. Intel Corp., Appeal Nos. 2020-1589, et al. (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2021) In the only precedential patent decision issued by the Federal Circuit this week, the Court addressed again the due process and statutory right of parties in IPR proceedings to have notice and an opportunity to be heard on theories that the PTAB may rely on in rendering its decisions ...
Chemours Company FC, LLC v. Daikin Industries, Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2020-1289, -1290 (Fed. Cir. July 22, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reversed a PTAB decision in consolidated IPRs that two patents were unpatentable as obvious. The Court held that the Board erred in reaching its conclusions both in terms of what the prior art taught and in application of objective indicia of nonobviousness ...
In re: Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., Appeal Nos. 2021-139, -140 (Fed. Cir. June 30, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit granted mandamus petitions filed by Samsung and LG Electronics, directing that patent cases pending against them in the Western District of Texas be transferred to the Northern District of California ...
Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, Appeal Nos. 2020-1475, -1605 (Fed. Cir. May 28, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit considered an appeal from the International Trade Commission affirming an Administrative Law Judge’s finding that 10X’s products violated the Tariff Act by infringing multiple patents and that they did not infringe another ...
