Tune In: Understanding Google v. Sonos and its Patent Prosecution Implications

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.

Liability Risks Before the UPC: How U.S. Companies Need to Prepare

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.

Other Barks & Bites for Friday, November 7: CJEU Action Against EU Commission Referred Over SEP Regulation; Ninth Circuit Affirms CoComelon Copyright Win; and C4IP Urges USTR to Address IP Concerns in USMCA Joint Review

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.

CAFC Denies Mandamus Petitions Seeking Reversal of New USPTO Policy on IPR Institution

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.

Squires Reluctantly Grants 15-Day Extension on Comments to Proposed IPR Practice Rule

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.”

No Infringement Intended: Is My Guitar Pedal a ‘Klone’ or a Counterfeit? Insights on the Intricacies of Trademark Law

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.

‘Informative’ Director Review Decision Expands on Approach to Petitioner’s Inconsistent Claim Constructions

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.

Subscribe to IPWatchdog

This is the best way to stay informed. We send a daily roundup of our latest news, press releases, and events.

Get Email Updates