Fed Circuit Watch: Computer Security Improvement Found Patent-Eligible

101 fed circuit watch patent patent eligible subject matter

Another patent-eligibility case has made its rounds through the appeals process, as the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in an opinion dated November 16, 2018, in Ancora Techs., Inc. v. HTC America, Inc.,[1] held that computer security improvement claim is patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. §101. Ancora owns U.S. Patent No. 6,411,941 (‘941) directed …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Primer and Diagnostic Method Claims Not Patent-Eligible

101 fed circuit watch patent patent eligible subject matter

This is the second §101 case decided by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on October 9, 2018, Roche Molecular Systs., Inc. v. Cepheid.[1]  This case is not so remarkable because it held patent claims as ineligible subject matter, but because there appears to be disjointed appellate §101 analysis applied between this case …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Electronic Tab Patents Found Patent-Eligible

101 fed circuit watch patent patent eligible subject matter

In the first of two cases analyzing patent subject matter-eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101 decided by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Data Engine Techs. LLC v. Google LLC,[1] issued on October 9, 2018, a circuit panel held certain patent claims directed to electronic worksheet tabs as patent-eligible.  Several other claims were found …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Patent Prosecution 101 – Don’t Mess with Your Priority!

fed circuit watch patent priority

A recent case decided by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Natural Alternatives Int’l, Inc. v. Iancu,[1] on October 1, 2018, highlights one of the pitfalls of patent prosecution that is sometimes overlooked or left to non-practitioner patent staff to handle but carries a major risk of losing patent term or patent priority.  …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: PTAB Messed Up Obviousness Analysis (Again)

103 fed circuit watch IPR obviousness overlapping ranges patent POSITA PTAB

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) seems to have bungled an obviousness analysis (again), and was dinged by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in E.I. DuPont de Nemours v. Synvina C.V.,[1] decided on September 17, 2018.  The case is a good primer on the law of obviousness related to overlapping ranges. …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: PTAB Bungles Real Party-in-Interest Analysis

collateral estoppel fed circuit watch IPR patent PTAB real party in interest

On September 7, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc.,[1] representing another case in the growing case law of IPRs and specifically, the time-bar application and collateral estoppel. Worlds Inc. owns U.S. Patent Nos. 7,945,856 (‘856), 8,082,501 (‘501), and 8,145,998 (‘998).  All are directed to methods and …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Different Evidence + Different Standards of Review = Different Validity Result

102 anticipation fed circuit watch patent prior art standard of review

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit presented an interesting paradox in patent validity challenges, especially when the same parties bring forth essentially the same issues, but have different results in different federal agency or judicial reviews, as was seen in Nobel Biocare Services AG v. Instradent USA, Inc.,[1] decided on September 13, 2018. …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Opioid Addiction Drug Patent Not Obvious

103 fed circuit watch motivation to combine obviousness patent POSITA

On September 10, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Orexo AB v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC,[1] in what turns out to be a fairly straightforward analysis of an obviousness case under 35 U.S.C. §103.  The facts are as follows. Orexo owns U.S. Patent No. 8,940,330 (‘330), which describes opioid treatment generally, and …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Broad Wins Latest CRISPR Court Battle

103 fed circuit watch interference motivation to combine obviousness patent POSITA reasonable expectation of success Tech Patents

On September 10, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Regents of the Univ. of Calif. v. Broad Inst., Inc.,[1] in the latest court battle in the CRISPR patent challenge pitting three of the nation’s largest research universities against each other. CRISPR, or “Clustered Regularly Interspaced Short Palindromic Repeats,” is a family …

Continue Reading

Fed Circuit Watch: Nexus Required Between Attorney Fees Award and Misconduct

ethics fed circuit watch fees inequitable conduct patent

Another recently unsealed opinion from August 15, 2018 revealed a decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit involving inequitable conduct and fee award.  In the opinion dated July 28, 2018, in In re Rembrandt Techs., LP Patent Litigation,[1] the Fed Circuit held that while the district court did not abuse its discretion, …

Continue Reading