IP Practicum: USPTO Proposes Patent Fee Increases for FY2019

ethics fees IP Practicum patent

On July 25, 2018, the USPTO submitted for publication a Federal Official Gazette notice of public hearing 2018-16432 pursuant to the Patent Public Advisory Committee (PPAC).  The notice specifies broad increases affecting patent filings and prosecution.  It was published on August 8, 2018, in the Federal Gazette. While most of the fees are in the …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: American Rule Does Not Require Applicants to Pay USPTO Attorneys’ Fees

fed circuit watch fees patent

“Each litigant pays his own attorney’s fees, win or lose.”[1]  As such, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the American Rule by holding that 35 U.S.C. §145 does not require losing applicants to pay USPTO attorneys’ fees in NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu,[2] in an en banc decision handed down on July 27, …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Result-Oriented Claims Not Patent-Eligible

101 fed circuit watch patent patent eligible subject matter

This case is the latest iteration of a protracted litigation between non-practicing entity Interval Licensing and AOL.[1]  In the current case, Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc.,[2] the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled on July 20, 2018, that a claim that merely recites a result without how to achieve that result was …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: PTAB Anticipation Analysis All Wrong

102 anticipation fed circuit watch IPR prior art

Anticipation in patent law means the claimed invention lacks novelty, or is not new; in other words, the invention was already invented.[1]  Anticipation, as codified in 35 U.S.C. §102(a) (or §102(b) in pre-AIA statute), is the gateway substantive legal analysis which must take place in order to assess patentability of an invention.  Therefore, when the …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Hyperlinked Material in Federal Register Notice is Prior Art

103 fed circuit watch IPR motivation to combine obviousness POSITA prior art SAS

What constitutes prior art is not as easy as it may seem.  While it may be uncontroverted that a Federal Register notice is prior art, the hyperlinked materials in that notice is what was at issue in Jazz Pharm., Inc. v. Amneal Pharm., Inc.,[1] decided by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on …

Continue Reading

Software Removing Metadata Not Enough Showing to “Conceal or Induce” Copyright Infringement

copyright DMCA technology

Technology is meant to make things easier or improve conditions in society.  However, sometimes technology, in the form of software, can sometimes do errant things that can create issues later.  So is the case with Stevens v. CoreLogic, Inc.,[1] decided by the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit on June 20, 2018.  The Ninth …

Continue Reading