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 67

PTAB grants request for rehearing relating to procedure for serving petitions
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 1 2014

In an order granting a request for rehearing to address the issue of a filing date of a petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and


Post-Alice Federal Circuit finds internet advertising method to not be patent eligible
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • November 18 2014

Citing the Supreme Court of the United States’ Spring 2014 decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit


Federal Circuit affirms jury verdict of invalidity based on on-sale bar and public use
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • June 28 2012

Affirming the district court’s judgment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit cleared Facebook of allegations of patent infringement, finding that that the patent in suit was invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) because the patentee’s product which embodied the patented subject matter was on sale and in public use more than one year before the filing of the patent


Amazon’s ‘one-click’ patent still alive in Canada
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • Canada
  • December 30 2011

The Canadian Federal Court of Appeal, addressing whether Amazon’s famous “one-click” business method was properly considered statutory subject matter under the Canadian Patent Act, allowed Amazon’s appeal from the Patent Appeal Board but directed the Commissioner of Patents to reexamine the patent on an expedited basis, not with the lower court’s direction that the claims at issue constituted patentable subject matter, but instead directing that the Commissioner identify the actual invention after a purposive construction of the claims


Wireless does not mean “without wires”; “streaming video” does not mean emailing a video file
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 25 2015

Reviewing a final written decision of U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board), finding application claims unpatentable, the U.S. Court of


Is “insolubly ambiguous” the correct standard to determine compliance with Sec 112?
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 5 2014

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari on a petition challenging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's standard for determining when


Nothing non-obvious about applying pre-existing technology to the Internet
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 28 2013

Addressing the issue of obviousness of patents directed to Internet-based software, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a


Post-Aliceclaims directed to an abstract idea must have meaningful limitations
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • December 30 2014

Addressing patent eligibility in a covered business method (CBM) patent review, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board


PTAB threatens sanctions for unauthorized e-mails
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 8 2014

Addressing a patent owner’s unauthorized e-mail arguing for additional discovery and the petitioner’s likewise unauthorized responsive e-mail, an


PTAB continues to evolve its covered business method patent jurisprudence
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 30 2015

In two related decisions, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) determined that patents directed to a personal computer interactive