Patent Exhaustion Redux: A Sale Is a Sale Is a Sale–And Once Sold, It’s Gone. The Supreme Court Reaffirms the Scope of Patent Exhaustion

On May 30, 2017, in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc.,[1] the U.S. Supreme Court held that patent exhaustion applies to sales made anywhere in the world, thereby [...]

This Dog No Longer Hunts in Marshall: The Supreme Court Limits Patent Venue

Today, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Group Brands LLC,[1] the US Supreme Court held that, for purposes of the patent venue statute,[2] a domestic corporation “resides” only in its state of [...]

Take Your Time to Sue:  The Supreme Court Says Laches Is the Same for Patents as for Copyrights

In SCA Hygiene Prods. Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Prods., LLC,[1] a patent infringement case, the US Supreme Court ruled that laches cannot be invoked to bar legal relief in the face of a [...]

Quantitative, Not Qualitative – The Supreme Court Overrules the Federal Circuit Again

In Life Techs. Corp. v. Promega Corp.,[1] the US Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit yet again, holding that making a single component of a patented invention in [...]

IPRs: Federal Circuit Affirms Nonappealability of PTAB Institution Decision

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decides petitions to institute post-grant proceedings, including inter partes reviews (IPRs).  PTAB institution decisions, as contrasted with the merits [...]

The Aahs Have It: Ordered Combination of Elements Morphs Into Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

In the fourth of a recent series of appellate decisions establishing patent-eligibility of patent claims post-Alice, in McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America,[1] the Court of Appeals for the [...]

IPRs: Federal Circuit Vacates “Unreasonable” PTAB Denial of Motion to Amend

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has received a lot of criticism because of how rarely the PTAB has granted patent owner motions to amend in post-grant proceedings, including inter partes [...]

Order in the Court – “Ordered Combination” of Method Elements Makes Liver Cell Preservation Invention Patent-Eligible

In recent articles, we have written about Federal Circuit reversals of invalidity decisions from district courts, based on patent-ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, in Enfish[1] and BASCOM.[2] [...]

IPRs:  Pre-Institution Patent Owner Evidence Does Not Include Petitioner’s Expert’s Deposition

In April, we wrote about the revisions to the rules of practice for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).[1]  Among those revisions was a rule enabling patent owners to [...]

Not Dead Yet – BASCOM Gives Alice a Different View Through the Looking Glass

More closely on the heels of the Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp.[1] decision than we might have expected, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has reversed yet another district court [...]

Cuozzo:  It’s OK for the PTO to Use BRI in IPRs

In Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee[1], the US Supreme Court actually affirmed the Federal Circuit in a patent case, an increasingly rare event.  The Supreme Court confirmed, unanimously, that the [...]

Did the Supreme Court Put Willful Infringement Back in the Money?

In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc.,[1] the US Supreme Court rejected an enhanced damages test that the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had required in cases of willful [...]

page 1 of 3