CAFC Affirms Fee Award Over Deficient Patent Pre-Suit Investigation

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Viavi Solutions Inc. v. Platinum Optics Technology Inc., affirming a Northern District of California ruling that awarded attorney’s fees to Platinum Optics Technology Inc. (PTOT) after finding Viavi Solutions Inc. litigated its patent infringement claims in a manner that met the standard for an “exceptional” case under 35 U.S.C. Section 285.

Smucker’s Survives Motion to Dismiss: What the Uncrustables Trade Dress Fight Means for the Private Label Economy

On September 1, a federal judge in the Northern District of Ohio J.M. Smucker Co.‘s trademark and trade dress claims over its crustless, crimped-edge peanut butter and jelly sandwiches. The ruling allows that was filed last October against Trader Joe’s private-label “Crustless Peanut Butter & Strawberry Jam Sandwiches” to proceed to discovery and, potentially, a merits determination on whether a sealed, circular sandwich shape can function as a protectable trademark.

Correcting the Uncorrectable: AI-Assisted Inventorship and Section 256

Under 35 U.S.C. Section 256, one can only correct an inventorship error when the underlying facts and the affected parties can actually be identified, and when the statutory correction procedure can be completed. AI-assisted invention is starting to produce cases where none of that is possible: the development record shows plenty of human activity, but nothing in it establishes which person actually conceived the claimed invention. After Fortress Iron, LP v. Digger Specialties, Inc., No. 2024-2313 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 2, 2026, that kind of gap can turn into a validity problem, not just a paperwork one.

How to Outsmart the Trap of Chinese Support Requirements

In a previous article, the authors showed that Chinese courts ask a different question than U.S. courts — not whether the inventor possessed what is recited in the claim, but whether the scope of the claim matches the Technical Solution that the invention actually contributed to the advance of the art. This difference in underlying premise leads to one conclusion: a U.S.-style specification needs to be adjusted when filed in China. Below, the authors propose several strategies, offered as their personal views.

Other Barks & Bites for Friday, September 4: D.C. Circuit Affirms Medical Device TPM Circumvention; U.S. Earns High Ratings in IP Index Statistic Annex; and Microsoft Edge is Not Important Gatekeeper Under DMA

This week in Other Barks & Bites: a House IP Subcommittee hearing on restoring the USPTO’s fee-setting authority turns heated over the original intention behind the America Invents Act; the Eleventh Circuit affirms a permanent injunction and trademark cancellation in an infringement case brought by the maker of “Wolf”-brand electric scooters; the United States scores high marks across 33 economic indicators in the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s recently released Statistical Annex to the International IP Index; the European General Court finds that Microsoft’s Edge browser is not an important gateway subject to regulations under the Digital Markets Act; the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirms the Library of Congress’ recent triennial rulemaking allowing circumventions to technological protection measures for medical devices; and Microsoft breaks out financial figures for its Azure cloud division for the first time in its most recent quarterly earnings report. 

Federal Circuit Affirms Judgment that Swiss Pharma Company Did Not Infringe Iron Deficiency Therapy Patent Claims

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Biofer S.p.A. v. Vifor (International) AG affirming a judgment of non-infringement by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in favor of Swiss Pharmaceutical company, Vifor (International) AG. The dispute centered on the construction of a claimed pH range recited in a patent covering a process for producing iron-sugar complexes used to treat iron deficiency.

CAFC Finds Most Patent Owner Arguments Forfeited in Vitamin D Baby Drops Appeal from PTAB

Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in Vieth v. MOM Enterprises, LLC affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) invalidation of Elaine and Dr. Reinhold Veith’s patent claims to methods of administering vitamin D to human beings. The Federal Circuit agreed that most of the claim construction and prior art arguments raised by the Vieths on appeal were forfeited for not being properly developed in the proceedings below, and also dismissed the Vieths’ contentions that they had established nexus between industry praise for its products and the challenged method claims.

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