Scientifically Impossible Claims – Not Indefinite, But Not Enabled
The Federal Circuit held that scientifically impossible-to-perform claims were not indefinite but were invalid for lack of enablement.
Is That a Rule 54(b) “Final Judgment”? A Stark Contrast Between Disposing All and Less Than All Asserted Claims of a Patent
Ari Feinstein & Colin D. Cormier
Since infringement of a patent is a single cause of action, a judgment that does not address all of the still-asserted claims of a patent is not a “final judgment” for Rule 54(b) purposes.
Courts Must Address Pre-Suit Invalidity Red Flags When Denying Sanctions and Fees
Ari Feinstein & Caroline Y. Manning
A district court must adequately explain its reasoning for denying motions for sanctions and attorneys’ fees to permit meaningful appellate review.
Ben Katzenellenbogen Explores “Perpetual Design Patents” in IPWatchdog Article
In a recent article published in IPWatchdog, Knobbe Martens’ Design Patent Litigation Practice Chair Ben Katzenellenbogen examines issues that can arise from overlapping trade dress and design patent rights.
In Journal of IP & Technology Law, Ari Feinstein and Charlene Azema Offer Roadmap to Litigating Lack-of-Bona Fide Intent Claims at the TTAB
Ari Feinstein & Charlene A. Azema
In a recent article published in the Journal of Intellectual Property & Technology Law, Knobbe Martens partners Ari Feinstein and Charlene Azema explore strategies for asserting and defending against lack-of-bona fide intent claims at the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB).
In Law360 Article, Sean Murray and Jeremiah Helm Explore Unanswered Questions in Federal Circuit Patent Marking Decision
Sean Murray & Jeremiah S. Helm, Ph.D.
In their latest Law360 column examining noteworthy IP decisions at the Federal Circuit, Knobbe Martens partners Sean Murray and Jeremiah Helm discuss VDPP LLC v. Volkswagen Group of America Inc.
Subscribe for News and Updates