The Federal Circuit Grounds US SPACE FORCE Trademark Application
IN RE THOMAS D. FOSTER, APC, Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Summary: Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act bars registration of a...
Did They Want to Infringe? – Federal Circuit Denies Declaratory Judgment When Party at No Risk of Lawsuit
[MITEK SYSTEMS, INC., v. UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION [OPINION]] Before Taranto, Schall, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas Summary: The plaintiff...
A Request for Sanctions Before the ITC Is Not Appealable to the Federal Circuit
REALTEK SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION v. ITC Before Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States International Trade Commission. Summary: The Federal Circuit lacks jurisdiction to hear appeals of non-final determinations from...
No Injury, No Appeal: Patent Owners Must Show Actual Injury for Article III Standing
DOLBY LABORATORIES LICENSING CORPORATION v. UNIFIED PATENTS, LLC Before Moore, Clevenger and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A patent owner lacks Article III standing to...
Finding Common Ground? — Federal Circuit Clarifies IPR Estoppel
INGENICO INC. v. IOENGINE, LLC Before Dyk, Prost, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: IPR estoppel does not preclude reliance on...
A Question for Everyone: Juries Must Determine Infringement on a Patent-By-Patent Basis
OPTIS CELLULAR TECHNOLOGY, LLC v. APPLE INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: Patent plaintiffs have a right...
Speculative Plans Are Insufficient to Establish Standing in PTAB Appeals
INCYTE CORPORATION v. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, INC. Before Moore, Hughes, and Cunningham. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Speculative plans for potentially infringing activity are insufficient to...
A Patent Does Not Guarantee the Patent Owner Will Be First to Market
INCYTE CORPORATION V. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, LTD. Before Moore, Prost and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Summary: A district court erred...
Reissue Applications Are Bound by the Scope of the Claims as Written, Not as Intended
IN RE KOSTIC Before Stoll, Clevenger, and Cunningham. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: When considering whether a reissue claim broadens the scope of the original patent,...
No Takebacks: The High Bar for Departing From Patent Lexicography
ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. MODERNA, INC. Before Taranto, Chen, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware Summary: Once the high threshold for lexicography is...
Keeping PACE With CRISPR
AGILENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. SYNTHEGO CORP. Before Prost, Linn, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Obviousness does not require all claimed limitations to be expressly...
Coloring Within the Lines: The Genericness Test for Color Trademarks
IN RE: PT MEDISAFE TECHNOLOGIES Before Prost, Clevenger, and Stark. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A proposed color mark was found generic where the relevant public...
Not Lost in Translation: Federal Circuit Clarifies Application of the Doctrine of Foreign Equivalents
IN RE: VETEMENTS GROUP AG Before Prost, Wallach, and Chen. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party opposing application of the doctrine of foreign equivalents has...
Running in Place: When a Running Royalty Is Actually a Lump Sum License
ECOFACTOR, INC. V. GOOGLE LLC Before the en banc court, Moore, Lourie, Dyk, Prost, Reyna, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, Stoll, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the...
Patent Claims Applying Machine Learning Methods to New Environment Do Not Withstand § 101 Scrutiny
RECENTIVE ANALYTICS, INC. v. FOX CORP. Before Dyk, Prost, and Goldberg. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The Federal Circuit found that claims applying established...
Equitable Estoppel: Misleading Silence Not Enough Unless It Was Relied on and Caused Prejudice
FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT v. SIRIUS XM RADIO INC. Before Lourie, Dyk, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The defense of equitable estoppel requires showing...
Inventive Concepts Must Be Included in the Claim Language
United Services Automobile Association v. PNC BANK N.A., Before Dyk, Clevenger, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: A claim that...
The Votes Are In: Highly Descriptive Marks Are Difficult to Protect
HERITAGE ALLIANCE V. AMERICAN POLICY ROUNDTABLE Before Prost, Taranto, and Stark. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Continuous-use evidence is not necessarily prima facie evidence of acquired...
Hard to Stomach: Things You Say to Prosecute a Patent Can and Will Be Used Against You
AZURITY PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. v. ALKEM LABORATORIES LTD. Before Murphy, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Arguments and amendments made during...
Fireball Frenzy: When First Registering a Mark, Genericness of a Mark Is Determined at the Time of Registration
BULLSHINE DISTILLERY LLC v. SAZERAC BRANDS, LLC Before Moore, Reyna and Taranto. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: In assessing genericness, the TTAB considers how the mark...
No Error: The Board Committed No Procedural Error by Relying on Evidence Outside of the Prior Art Reference
SAGE PRODUCTS, LLC v. STEWART [OPINION] Before Reyna, Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board did not...
