Posts Tagged: Judge Kathleen O’Malley


CAFC says Antedating a Reference under Section 102(g) Focuses on Critical Period as a Whole

In an IPR decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board invalidated several claims from U.S. Patent No. 6,030,384 as anticipated or obvious over Japanese Publication No. H1033551…

CAFC Judges invite en banc review of holding that PTAB decisions to initiate IPRs are unreviewable

''It appears to me that en banc consideration [of Achates] is warranted,'' Judge Taranto wrote. ''It is notable, to begin with, that the [Supreme] Court pointedly …
By John M. Rogitz
9 days ago 5

Disclaimers of Claim Scope Viewed in Context of the Entire Prosecution History

The Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that this evidence did not demonstrate a “clear and unmistakable” disclaimer in claim scope. The Court emphasized that disavowals …

En Banc Federal Circuit finds substantial evidence to support jury verdict in Apple v. Samsung

The Court found substantial evidence to support the jury’s finding of infringement. While Samsung’s expert offered conflicting testimony, a reasonable jury could have credited Apple’…

In non-precedential decision, CAFC says prevailing party can challenge claim construction

what is particularly interesting about this case is that Smith, who had prevailed at the district court and was awarded about $322,500 in damages, thought he could not …
By John M. Rogitz
2 months ago 0

In non-precedential decision CAFC reverses PTAB finding of obviousness in reexamination

In re: Natural Alternatives, LLC, 2015-1911 (opinion and errata) is a non-precedential but still notable case from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit …
By John M. Rogitz
2 months ago 1

PTAB arbitrary and capricious in denying motion to amend in IPR

In the final decision by the Board in the IPR, the Board denied the patent owner’s motion solely because the patent owner did not discuss whether …
By Gene Quinn
3 months ago 5

CAFC: Obviousness Analysis Must be Based on More than Common Sense

The Court recognized that “‘[c]ommon sense has long been recognized to inform the analysis of obviousness if explained with sufficient reasoning.’” However, “there are at least …

Co-Inventors Must be Named, Even Those who Contribute to One Aspect of One Claim

On appeal, the Federal Circuit reviewed whether there was substantial evidence supporting the district court’s finding that Nathan and Matheson should be added as co-inventors. In …

Negotiation to Sell Products Outside the US is not an Infringing Offer for Sale

The Federal Circuit again addressed whether Pulse’s domestic sales activities were either a sale or an offer for sale in the U.S. While the patent …

Common sense is no substitute for reasoned analysis and evidentiary support

O’Malley recognized that in Perfect Web the Federal Circuit did authorize the use of common sense to supply a missing claim limitation, but she pointed out …
By Gene Quinn
4 months ago 15

CAFC: Reasonable Litigation Defenses No Defense to Willfulness; Permanent Injunction Denial Was Abuse of Discretion

Under the Federal Circuit’s reading of Halo, companies can no longer rely solely on reasonable litigation-inspired defenses to prevent a finding of willfulness... The Federal Circuit …

CAFC: PTAB Improperly Shifted Burden of Proof on Obviousness to Patent Owner in IPR

The Federal Circuit reversed the Board’s obviousness ruling, finding that the Board had improperly shifted burdens onto Magnum, the Patent Owner, in several instances. For example, …

In BASCOM v. AT&T the CAFC says software patent eligible again

This case arrived at the Federal Circuit on an appeal brought by BASCOM from the district court’s decision to grant a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(…
By Gene Quinn
5 months ago 26

Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement and Untimely Assertion of DOE Infringement

The Federal Circuit found that the specification explicitly supported the district court’s claim construction, which precluded a finding of infringement. Two passages specified the meaning of, …