On November 14, 2017, the USPTO issued its final rule on new fees for Fiscal Year 2017.[1] There are some marked increases, several moderate increases, some nominal increases, a few new fees, and some fees which have been eliminated altogether. The new fee schedule reflects a strategic goal for aligning fees to their associated costs …
Category: patent
USPTO Issues Public Comments for §101 Subject Matter Eligibility
By Brent T. Yonehara On July 30, 2017, the USPTO released its §101 report, Patent Eligible Subject Matter: Report on Views and Recommendations From the Public. The report is a rather dry recitation of the §101 legal framework better suited for a Patent Bar Exam prep course. However, there is an interesting comparative overlay of …
Fed Circuit Watch: Litigation Misconduct and Inequitable Conduct
By Brent T. Yonehara On July 27, 2017, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Merus B.V. In Regeneron, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that Regeneron’s patent 8,502,018 was unenforceable due to inequitable conduct.[1] This case brings up the Therasense New Order of Inequitable Conduct in …
SCOTUS Watch: Cert Granted in Oil States: the Constitutionality of IPR Proceedings
By Brent T. Yonehara On June 12, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC.[1] Of the three issues presented by petitioner Oil States, only one will be heard before the Supreme Court, namely: Whether inter partes review – an adversarial process used …
SCOTUS Watch: Supreme Court Redefines the Patent Exhaustion Doctrine
By Brent T. Yonehara On May 30, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc.[1], reversing the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on the scope of the patent exhaustion doctrine, also known as the first sale doctrine, and unequivocably stated in its opinion that “a patentee’s decision to …
Fed Circuit Watch: Helsinn and the On-Sale Bar
By Brent T. Yonehara On May 1, 2017, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals decided Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., 2016-1284, 2016-1787 (Fed. Cir. 2017), holding that the on-sale bar of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) invalidated four patents held by Helsinn, for treatment of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). The patents …
SCOTUS Watch: TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC
By Brent T. Yonehara On May 22, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important ruling, TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, 581 U.S.___ (2017), in patent venue, and specifically limited the ability of patent litigation plaintiffs to file in nearly any U.S. District Court in the country, and held a defendant …
Alice in Wonderland: Software Patents in Light of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l
By Brent T. Yonehara INTRODUCTION Alice Corporation v. CLS Bank International was recently decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in the closing days of its 2013-2014 term.[1] In Alice, the Supreme Court found that patent claims that do not “transform” from patent-ineligible subject matter to a patent-eligible invention were abstract ideas outside the scope of …