On remand from the Federal Circuit the PTAB granted authorization for a patent owner to file a supplement to its Motion to Amend in Veeam Software Corporation v. Veritas Technologies LLC, IPR2014-00090, Paper 42 (P.T.A.B. Jan. 27, 2017).
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently held in Ex parte Itagaki and Nishiara (PTAB 2016) that claims reciting a magnetic resonance imaging apparatus are directed to ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The PTAB recently granted a request for rehearing and modified the final written decision in WesternGeco LLC v. PGS Geophysical AS, IPR2015-00313, Paper 43 (P.T.A.B., Feb. 3, 2017). This is an extremely rare event.
In 2011, Apple sued Samsung alleging among other things that various portions of Samsung smartphone products infringed claims of certain design patents owned by Apple (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.). In 2012, the jury found that Samsung infringed on several of Apple’s patents and awarded Apple 1.1 billion in damages.
On January 18, 2017, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments regarding whether the Lanham Act’s provision refusing federal trademark registration to disparaging marks is invalid under the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.
Although trademarks and copyrights most frequently come to mind when considering the types of intellectual property protection available for fashion items, design patents can also offer valuable protection. A design patent is a form of legal protection directed to the ornamental appearance of an otherwise functional item.
After the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, dubbed “Brexit” by the press, many have called into question whether the UK would ratify the Unitary Patent System. The Unitary Patent System will create a Unitary Patent and a Unitary Patent Court (UPC) system to enforce patents across many European states.
The Federal Circuit recently found claims to a specialized graphical user interface (GUI) for trading financial securities eligible in Trading Technologies Int’l v. CQG, No. 2016-2016 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 18, 2017). The Federal Circuit’s opinion shows that claims directed toward a software GUI can be patent-eligible subject matter if the invention improves the speed and accuracy with which a user can perform a task—even if that task is part of a business process.
On January 13, 2017, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Amgen v. Sandoz, 794. F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2015) and Sandoz v. Amgen, 773 F.3d 1274 (Fed. Cir. 2014), appealed from the Federal Circuit. The petitions involve the Federal Circuit’s interpretation of certain provisions of the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA).
Every year, the FDA’s Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER) approves new medications. Some medications are variations of existing products, such as generic formulations or new dosage forms of previously-approved products.
