The Federal Circuit issued its long-awaited decision in Google LLC v. Sonos, Inc. on August 28, 2025, providing guidance on the doctrine of prosecution laches. As the first U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decision on prosecution laches for a patent issued after 1995—when patent terms changed from 17-years-from issuance to 20-years-from filing—some suspected the Federal Circuit might definitively end the prosecution laches doctrine. Although prosecution laches remains a valid equitable defense, the Federal Circuit placed significant limitations on its applicability.
In less than 2.5 years, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has established itself as a hallmark for high-profile patent litigation. This venue is a reality that U.S. companies need to be aware of Why? U.S. companies are “at both sides of the v” before the UPC. Below are the 10 most important questions that define liability risks before the UPC, both from a defendant’s and a plaintiff’s perspective. These questions will be put into perspective and compared to U.S. district court and International Trade Commission (ITC) litigation.
This week in Other Barks & Bites: the Federal Circuit finds that Motorola failed to demonstrate a protectable property interest in its challenge to the USPTO’s rescission of former Director Vidal’s “compelling merits” memo; Samsung gets hit with a $191.4 million jury verdict over OLED display technologies;the Council for Innovation Promotion asks the U.S. Trade Representative to address specific shortcomings in IP protections among America’s trading partners during joint review of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement; and more.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) has denied three mandamus petitions asking the court to step in and curb the recently-implemented practice by which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director decides whether to institute inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. In the one precedential ruling in In Re Motorola Solutions, Inc., the CAFC—in an opinion authored by Judge Linn—rejected Motorola’s arguments that then-Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the Due Process clause of the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution by deinstituting eight IPR petitions it filed against claims of Stellar LLC’s patents.
This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we tackle the impact of tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty on intellectual property (IP) strategy, budgets and patent portfolios. In today’s fast-paced global economy, intellectual property (IP) teams face unprecedented challenges and opportunities. The world is witnessing a flux of geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties, and rapid technological advancements, all of which demand agility and strategic foresight from IP professionals. Meanwhile, to complicate matters the United States is attempting to rearrange international business norms by diversifying supply chains for particularly important goods and components, while simultaneously aggressively using tariffs to change global economic behavior and settle international conflicts and wars. There is no doubt that this is a tumultuous time for all businesses, which demands attention, forethought and deliberate strategic action.
This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we tackle the impact of tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty on intellectual property (IP) strategy, budgets and patent portfolios. In today’s fast-paced global economy, intellectual property (IP) teams face unprecedented challenges and opportunities. The world is witnessing a flux of geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties, and rapid technological advancements, all of which demand agility and strategic foresight from IP professionals. Meanwhile, to complicate matters the United States is attempting to rearrange international business norms by diversifying supply chains for particularly important goods and components, while simultaneously aggressively using tariffs to change global economic behavior and settle international conflicts and wars. There is no doubt that this is a tumultuous time for all businesses, which demands attention, forethought and deliberate strategic action.
This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I speak with Dana Colarulli, who is a partner at ACG Advocacy—one of the premiere intellectual property lobby firms in Washington, DC. During our conversation we delve into the intricate world of patent policy and politics, discussing laws, the dynamic environment at the USPTO. Dana shares his extensive experience and insights on high-growth technology businesses. We address critical topics such as the recent shake-ups at the USPTO, the controversial “patent tax” proposal, how despite the fact that the USPTO is user-fee funded it is being swept up in broader Trump Administration efforts to downsize the federal government, what the word “innovation” really means, how businesses use intellectual property assets, the importance of predictable IP assets, the challenges of effective patent valuation, international collaboration and education to support small and medium size enterprises (SMEs), and much more.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced today that it is extending the comment period for a proposed rule published on October 17 by 15 days in response to requests from stakeholders. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) titled “Revision to Rules of Practice before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board” has as its stated goal “to focus inter partes review proceedings on patent claims that have not previously been challenged in litigation or where prior litigation was resolved at an early stage.” A press release issued on the NPRM said that, under current practice, “the Office is concerned that even extremely strong patents become unreliable when subject to serial or parallel challenges.”
For many guitarists, finding the right tone is a lifelong pursuit. It’s the quest for the perfect sound—a sound controlled not only by the guitar or the amplifier but also by the complex chain of electronics connecting them. Central to this are the effects pedals, and few pedals have the same mythical status as the Klon Centaur. This legendary pedal, built by guitarist and designer Bill Finnegan in the 1990s, was the subject of a recent trademark lawsuit that drew a line between a respectful “klone” (often spelled with a “K”) and an infringing counterfeit.
Continuing his pro-patent owner tack so far, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires on Wednesday designated as “informative” a Director Review decision in which he relied on the recently-designated precedential decision in Revvo Technologies, Inc. v. Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc. to vacate and deny institution of an inter partes review filed by Tesla, Inc.
On Friday, October 10, we hosted an impromptu webinar with the intention of using that conversation as our next podcast. While this is not always feasible, because we do often have PowerPoint slides when we host webinars, this webinar was simply a conversation about a very important recent decision of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) without any slides. The case we discuss is Philips v. Belkin, where after the conclusion of all appeals, the UPC issued the first ever final permanent injunction in a case involving standard essential patents (SEPs). So, our conversation this week is about the impact and ramifications of the UPC’s final decision in Philips v. Belkin. We discussed the UPC’s final decision and permanent injunction in Philips v. Belkin with an in-house attorney from Philips and the litigation team at Bardehle Pagenberg in Germany that represented Philips in this important win. By originally having this conversation as a webinar with a live audience, I was able to incorporate questions from the audience, which you’ll hear periodically throughout the podcast.
This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, we welcome Marlene Valderrama, who is Principal Intellectual Property Manager & Technology Scout for Halliburton. During our conversation, Marlene shares insights from her role as an innovation scout, the challenges of encouraging innovators inside Halliburton to recognize the importance and magnitude of their novel contributions, and the exciting advancements in drilling technology facilitated by AI. The conversation delves into best practices for AI implementation and the importance of continuous training for IP and innovation management. Additionally, Marlene opens up about her personal journey, her unexpected career path from drilling engineer to IP advocate, her passion for giving back through long-distance biking to raise money for multiple sclerosis research, and much more.
In a spirited discussion at our annual Women’s IP Forum, attendees were treated to an insightful fireside-style chat conversation with the Honorable Judge Pauline Newman, a trailblazer for women in law and a luminary in the field of intellectual property. Judge Newman spoke with Renee C. Quinn, Chief Operating Officer of IPWatchdog, Inc. Her career has been marked by a commitment to innovation and the advancement of strong intellectual property rights, shaping the very foundation of modern patent law. But did you know that Judge Newman was until a few years ago an active and licensed pilot? Did you know that she tutored singer/ songwriter legend Joan Baez in chemistry when Baez was in high school? While so much of Judge Newman’s life has been well documented, there are so many layers to her extraordinary life.
This is the best way to stay informed. We send a daily roundup of our latest news, press releases, and events.
Get Email Updates