OCIPLA OCIPLA OCIPLA
  • Home
  • About
    • About OCIPLA
    • Committees
    • Past Presidents
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • News
  • Membership
  • Contact
OCIPLA OCIPLA
  • Home
  • About
    • About OCIPLA
    • Committees
    • Past Presidents
    • Bylaws
  • Events
  • News
  • Membership
  • Contact
Sep 21

Federal Circuit Summaries (8 of 10)

Somebody’s Wrong:  PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR  In Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., Appeal No. 21-1179, the Federal Circuit held that, for purposes of determining whether a reference was prior art, the Board has an obligation to resolve fundamental testimonial conflicts.  Google petitioned for inter partes... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Uncategorized
Sep 21

Federal Circuit Summaries (9 of 10)

Commissioner’s Exercise of Vacant Director’s Duties Does Not Violate Appointments Clause Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 18-2140 Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: During vacancies of the Director and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office,... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Uncategorized
Sep 21

Federal Circuit Summaries (10 of 10)

The Heightened Standard of Proving Induced Infringement Roche Diagnostics Corporation v. Meso Scale Diagnostics, LLC, Appeal No. 21-1609, the Federal Circuit held that a finding of induced infringement requires knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement, which can be established by a finding of ‘willful blindness,’ a standard of... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Uncategorized
Sep 21

District Court and PTAB Happenings (1 of 4)

Contributors: Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP PTAB: Applicant-Admitted Prior Art Out of Bounds in IPR, If Used as Basis for Challenge by Karina J. Moy & Rubén H. Muñoz Apr. 29, 2022 Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Inter Partes Review, 35 U.S.C. § 311(b) In an inter partes... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Patent
Sep 21

District Court and PTAB Happenings (2 of 4)

District Court Granted Judgment on the Pleadings Because the Patents Recited Patent-Ineligible Mathematical Techniques Executed in an Aircraft Flight Control System by C. Brandon Rash & Brooks J. Kenyon May 2, 2022 District Court, Abstract Ideas, 35 U.S.C. § 101 Judge Orrick in the Northern District of California recently granted... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Patent
Sep 21

District Court and PTAB Happenings (3 of 4)

Voluntary Nature of IPR Proceedings Forecloses Attorney’s Fees, According to District Court by Megan R. Mahoney, Jason Weil & Rubén H. Muñoz Jun. 14, 2022 District Court, Inter Partes Review, 35 U.S.C. § 285 A district court recently denied a motion for attorney’s fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 where... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Patent
Sep 21

District Court and PTAB Happenings (4 of 4)

USPTO: Compelling Evidence of Unpatentability Forecloses Fintiv Denial by Megan R. Mahoney, Daniel L. Moffett & Rubén H. Muñoz Jun. 29 '22 Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Patent Litigation, Inter Partes Review The USPTO recently issued new guidance on how the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) will apply Apple... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Patent
Sep 21

Internet Sightings

by Frederic M. Douglas and James E. Hawes This column highlights some of the more notable recent online notices, newsletters, and blogs dealing with IP prosecution issues.  Patently-O – a patent law blog – Patentlyo.com * Nonce words and Means Plus Function Claims – You usually want to avoid Section... read more →
  • September 21, 2022
  • staff
  • Copyright, Patent, Trademark
May 10

Federal Circuit Summaries (1 of 12)

Contributors: Knobbe Martens Ranges for Interdependent and Interactive Components Can Be Tricky to Derive In Modernatx, Inc. v. Arbutus Biopharma Corporation, Appeal No. 20-2329, the Federal Circuit held that  a presumption of obviousness based on overlapping ranges requires showing that the overlapping range is actually taught by the prior art.... read more →
  • May 10, 2022
  • staff
  • Uncategorized
May 10

Federal Circuit Summaries (2 of 12)

Intrinsic Evidence Trumps Plain and Ordinary Meaning In Astrazeneca Ab v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Appeal No. 21-1729, the Federal Circuit held that for purposes of claim construction, intrinsic evidence can trump the plain and ordinary meaning of scientific conventions such as significant figures.   AstraZeneca AB and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP (collectively,... read more →
  • May 10, 2022
  • staff
  • Uncategorized
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • ...
  • 16

« Previous Page — Next Page »

Recent Posts

  • Job Announcement: Intellectual Property Junior Associate/Patent Agent (Contract and/or Full-Time)
  • Federal Circuit Summaries (1 of 8)
  • Federal Circuit Summaries (2 of 8)
  • Federal Circuit Summaries (3 of 8)
  • Federal Circuit Summaries (4 of 8)

Archives

  • April 2023
  • January 2023
  • September 2022
  • May 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • March 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • September 2020
  • June 2020
  • April 2020
  • February 2020
  • September 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • January 2019
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • April 2017
  • February 2017
  • October 2016

Categories

  • Amicus Briefs
  • Copyright
  • Education and Training
  • Employment
  • Federal Circuit Summary
  • News
  • Non-Obviousness
  • Patent
  • Patent Trial and Appeal Board
  • Trade secret
  • Trademark
  • Uncategorized


Serving the Orange County Intellectual Property law community since 1983.

Orange County Intellectual Property Law Association
P.O. Box 7632
Newport Beach, CA 92658

About
Membership
Bylaws
Contact

© 2025 OCIPLA | All Rights Reserved | Website design by SafeHouse Web