On January 14, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., No. 23-2346 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 14, 2025), addressing whether a published patent application can serve as prior...
Client-Centered Intellectual Property Solutions
Firm News
Federal Circuit Weighs the Need for Claim Construction at the Rule 12 Stage
On October 18, 2024, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in UTTO Inc. v. Metrotech Corp., No. 2023-1435, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 26340, (Fed. Cir. Oct. 18, 2024) addressing the propriety of conducting claim construction at the Rule 12 stage. UTTO alleged that...
Generalized Testimony Falls Short in Doctrine of Equivalents Analysis
On October 24, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in Nexstep, Inc. v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, affirming the District Court for the District of Delaware’s judgment of non-infringement regarding two patents held...
The Hidden Hurdles Of Section 101 Eligibility Determinations
On August 6, 2024, in Mobile Acuity Ltd. v Blippar Ltd., __F.4th__; 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 17573* (Fed. Cir. Aug. 6, 2024), the Federal Circuit upheld the Rule 12 dismissal of Mobile Acuity’s patent infringement lawsuit against Blippar on the basis that the two...
Common Patent Litigation Defenses Insufficient To Justify Award Of Attorneys’ Fees
In Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Sling TV, LLC, et al., 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 21348 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 23, 2024), the Federal Circuit, in an opinion authored by Judge Alan D. Albright sitting by designation, vacated and remanded an award of attorneys’ fees to the...
Intrinsic Record Paramount In Rule 12 Eligibility Determinations
In the recent decision of Miller Mendel, Inc. v. City of Anna, Texas, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 17637 (Fed. Cir. July 18, 2024), the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s grant of a motion for judgment on the pleadings under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This case provides...
Supreme Court Uses Enablement To Curb Broad Patents
On May 18, 2023, the Supreme Court held claims of two patents owned by Amgen, Inc. to be invalid for failing to enable persons skilled in the art to practice the invention as required by 35 U.S.C. §112. Amgen, Inc., et al. v. Sanofi, et al. ___ U.S. ___, No. 21-757...
District Court Finding of Invalidity Does Not Excuse Applying Fintiv Factors For Discretionary Denial
On May 2, 2023, in Volvo Penta of the America’s, LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Case No. 2022-1366 et al., Paper 15 (PTAB May 2, 2023), Director Vidal sua sponte vacated a PTAB decision denying IPR institution due to a district court finding of invalidity. ...
Federal Circuit Revives Big Tech’s Fintiv Challenge
On March 13, 2023, in Apple, Inc., et al. v. Vidal, Case No. 2022-1249 (Fed. Cir. March 13, 2023), the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a decision from the Northern District of California dismissing a lawsuit filed by several large technology companies for lack...
Plausible Factual Allegations Supported By The Intrinsic Record Key To Overcoming Section 101 Patent-Eligibility Challenge
On September 28, 2022, the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a decision from the Northern District of California granting a Rule 12 Motion to Dismiss on the basis that claims of U.S. Patent No. 9,432,452 were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Coop. Entm’t, Inc. v....