We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance

Results:1-10 of 10,296

Challenges for Protecting Genetic Patents
  • Watermark Intellectual Property
  • USA, Australia
  • November 16 2018

Decades of advances in sequencing technology have led to breakthroughs in not just the sensitivity of DNA tests, but also the speed and costs

Equitable Defenses at the PTAB
  • Ropes & Gray LLP
  • USA
  • November 15 2018

The doctrine of assignor estoppel bars the assignor of a patent from challenging the validity of the patent after it is assigned. In considering this

So You Want to Buy or Sell a Biologics Company? The Impact of Vanda on Biologics IP Due Diligence
  • Venable LLP
  • USA
  • November 14 2018

Conducting IP due diligences for biologics products can require some significant forethought. In addition to properly valuing the existing IP from a

Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in IPR Proceedings
  • Cozen O'Connor
  • USA
  • November 14 2018

On November 9, 2018, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., an appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal

Assignor Estoppel & Inter-Partes Review: Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
  • Dilworth IP
  • USA
  • November 13 2018

Arista Networks, Inc. (Arista) petitioned for an IPR of Cisco Systems, Inc.’s (“Cisco”) patent, U.S. 7,340,597, relating to protecting computer

Federal Circuit Review - October 2018
  • Knobbe Martens
  • USA
  • November 12 2018

In Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1481, -1546, -1583, the Federal Circuit held that the PTAB may initially accept an IPR Petitioner’s

Federal Circuit Holds that Assignor Estoppel is not Available in Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceedings
  • Vinson & Elkins LLP
  • USA
  • November 12 2018

In Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Nos. 2017-1525 and 2017-1577 (November 9, 2018), the Federal Circuit held that assignor estoppel is

Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
  • Knobbe Martens
  • USA
  • November 12 2018

Dr. David Cheriton is the named inventor of U.S. Patent No. 7,340,597 (“the ’597 patent”), which is owned by Cisco Systems, Inc. At the time of

Claims for Analyzing Twitter Posts Held Unpatentable by Judge Castel
  • Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP
  • USA
  • November 9 2018

On October 29, 2018, United States District Judge P. Kevin Castel (S.D.N.Y.) issued a decision granting Defendant Bloomberg's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to

High Court to Tackle Whether Government Can Petition PTAB
  • Jones Day
  • USA
  • November 8 2018

On October 26, 2018, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service, et al. (17-1594) to address whether