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 194

CAFC Holds USPTO Cannot Recover Attorneys’ Fees Under 35 USC 145 in Nantkwest v. Iancu
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • August 15 2018

In Nantkwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 2016-1794 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2018), the CAFC, sitting en banc (excl. Chen, C.J.), affirmed the district court’s


Vanda Pharm. Inc. v. West-Ward Pharm.
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • August 1 2018

On June 7, 2018, USPTO Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Procedure Robert W. Bahr issued a Memorandum on Recent Subject Matter Eligibility


Claiming an Economic Practice or a Mathematical Technique after SAP America, Inc., v. Investpic, LLC.
  • Workman Nydegger
  • USA
  • July 25 2018

Alice rejections (rejections under 35 U.S.C. 101) often relate to claims that are rejected as being directed to abstract ideas, without


U.S. Supreme Court broadens the territorial scope of patent damages
  • Tarter Krinsky & Drogin LLP
  • USA
  • July 20 2018

In a 7-2 decision, its first to address the extraterritorial scope of patent damages since passage of the modern Patent Act, the U.S. Supreme Court


Is the Government a “Person” Who May Institute PTAB Trials?
  • Jones Day
  • USA
  • July 11 2018

The America Invents Act (“AIA”) provides that a “a person may not file a petition for covered business method review unless the person or the


U.S. Supreme Court Opens the Door to Allow Patent Owners to Recover Foreign Lost Profits
  • Squire Patton Boggs
  • USA
  • June 24 2018

The United States Supreme Court ruled on Friday that a patent owner can, at least in some situations, recover lost profits for the unauthorized use of


Federal Circuit Requests Briefing from Patent Office Regarding 315(b) Time-Bar Determinations
  • Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
  • USA
  • June 14 2018

On June 7, 2018, the Federal Circuit in Wi-Fi One, LLC v. Broadcom Corp. requested that intervenor, Patent Office director Andrei Iancu, and appellee


Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics - May 15, 2018
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • June 12 2018

Through May 15, 2018, the Federal Circuit decided 364 PTAB appeals from IPRs and CBMs. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB on every issue in 276 (75


Non-Patent Literature at the PTAB
  • Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, PC
  • USA
  • June 12 2018

Typically, the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) is thought to disfavor non-patent literaturethat is, “printed publications” under 35 U.S.C


Chief Judge Guidance: SAS Impact, Motions to Amend, and Claim Construction
  • Jones Day
  • USA
  • June 8 2018

On June 5, 2018, Chief Judge David Ruschke and Vice Chief Judge Tim Fink of the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) participated in a webinar