Patent Term Adjustment and Obviousness-Type Double Patenting: Cellect’s Bid for Supreme Court Review
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
10h ago
by Dennis Crouch The Federal Circuit’s August 2023 decision in In re Cellect, LLC has set-up a significant question regarding the interplay between the patent term adjustment (PTA) statute, 35 U.S.C. § 154(b), and the judicially-created doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting (OTDP). Now, Cellect is seeking Supreme Court review, recently filing a petition for an extension of time that also indicated its intent to file. Cellect’s petition is now due May 20, 2024, and I expect significant support from the patent owner community. Patentees often receive PTA due to USPTO delays that otherwis ..read more
Visit website
The Design Law Treaty and the Struggle for International Harmonization of Industrial Design Protection
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
2d ago
By Dennis crouch The international IP community is moving toward further harmonizing legal protection for industrial designs. For almost twenty years, member states of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) have been negotiating a Design Law Treaty (DLT) that would streamline and align procedural requirements for obtaining registered design rights across jurisdictions. If successful, the DLT would make it “significantly easier for small and medium-sized enterprises to obtain industrial design protection overseas as a result of simplified, streamlined and aligned procedures and req ..read more
Visit website
Guest post by Prof. Holbrook: Extraterritoriality and Patent Damages Under § 271(a)
Patently-O
by Jason Rantanen
3d ago
Guest post by Tim Holbrook. Robert B. Yegge Endowed Distinguished Professor of Law and Provost’s Professor, University of Denver Sturm College of Law. United States patents are generally territorial.  Their exclusive rights only operate within the United States and its territories.  Or so one may think reading the Patent Act.  Moreover, in a global marketplace, the territorial nature of intellectual property rights can create challenges. It would be simpler for a patent holder to just use the U.S. patent to cover foreign activity. This is especially true if a domestic act of inf ..read more
Visit website
Using AI in your Patent Practice
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
4d ago
By Dennis Crouch Over the past year I’ve been investigating various generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI) tools for assisting patent attorneys in their practice.  I have a strong belief that these tools and their progeny are now fixtures in our legal environment and are being used to both improve efficient delivery of legal services and to also improve the quality of those services.  Of course the generative creativity of our LLMs go hand in hand with hidden false narratives or hallucinations. Vendors are stepping up to thread the needle here: providing valuable GenAI tools whil ..read more
Visit website
Docketing Nightmare: CPA Global wins Despite their Docketing Error; Law Firm still on the hook for Missed Deadline
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
4d ago
By Dennis Crouch In a recent unpublished decision, the Georgia Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of CPA Global Support Services, LLC (“CPA”) (now part of Clarivate) against a claim of negligent misrepresentation brought by inventor James C. Robinson, M.D. and his patent holding company (Spectrum Spine).  Robinson’s firm FisherBroyles had relied upon the dates erroneously entered by CPA and missed the national stage filing deadlines.  The parallel case against FisherBroyles is still pending in Georgia state court. Robinson v. CPA Global Support Services, LLC, No. A24 ..read more
Visit website
Federal Circuit Affirms ITC Divided Opinion in Sonos v. ITC
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
5d ago
by Dennis Crouch In a non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit has affirmed the US International Trade Commission’s (ITC) final determination in the patent infringement dispute between Sonos and Google involving smart speaker technology. Sonos, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Nos. 2022-1421, 2022-1573 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 8, 2024).  The ITC had issued a split opinion – finding that Google infringed a number of Sonos speaker patents, but concluded that Google’s proposed work-around was non-infringing.  Both sides appealed and the Federal Circuit’s deferential standard of review resulted i ..read more
Visit website
De Forest Radio v. GE: A Landmark Supreme Court Decision on the Invention Requirement
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
6d ago
By Dennis Crouch In 1931, the United States Supreme Court decided a landmark case on the patentability of inventions, De Forest Radio Co. v. General Electric Co., 283 U.S. 664 (1931), amended, 284 U.S. 571 (1931). The case involved a patent infringement suit over an improved vacuum tube used in radio communications. While the case predated the codification of the nonobviousness requirement in 35 U.S.C. § 103 as part of the Patent Act of 1952, it nonetheless applied a similar requirement for “invention.” I wanted to review the case because it is one relied upon in the recent Vanda v. Teva pet ..read more
Visit website
Munsingwear Mootness in Sumitomo Pharma v. Vidal
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
6d ago
by Dennis Crouch Although non-precedential, the Federal Circuit’s new decision in Sumitomo Pharma v. Vidal offers the important conclusion that a patentee has no standing to appeal an invalidity holding once the patent expires, absent some showing of likely infringement during the prior six years.  Sumitomo Pharma Co. v. Vidal, No. 22-2276 (Fed. Cir. April 5, 2024).  The case is not so bad for the patentee because the court also vacated the IPR decision under Munsingwear. Under Article III of the Constitution, federal courts are limited to deciding actual “Cases” and “Controversies ..read more
Visit website
Guest Post: Where Are the Patent Judge Shoppers Going?
Patently-O
by Jason Rantanen
1w ago
By Paul R. Gugliuzza and J. Jonas Anderson In the past few weeks, more and more people outside of patent law have learned about ‘judge shopping’—quirks in procedural rules that allow plaintiffs to pick not just a court but the individual judge who will hear their case. Republican state attorneys general and conservative activists have been exploiting those rules to challenge federal government policies on abortion, immigration, gun control, transgender rights, and more in front of sympathetic, Republican-appointed judges, primarily in Amarillo and Wichita Falls, Texas. Last month, the Judicia ..read more
Visit website
USPTO Fees: Targeted Higher Fees to Push for Compact
Patently-O
by Dennis Crouch
1w ago
by Dennis Crouch The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently proposed a new fee structure for fiscal year 2025, which includes significant increases in various patent fees. [Read the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking] While incremental fee adjustments are common, the proposed changes for FY2025 are particularly noteworthy due to their magnitude in certain targeted areas and potential impact on applicant behavior. Many filers will likely change their practices based on the new higher fees. The USPTO appears to be using these fee adjustments as a tool to shape patent prosecution s ..read more
Visit website

Follow Patently-O on FeedSpot

Continue with Google
Continue with Apple
OR