Posts Tagged: patent claims


Introduction to Patent Prosecution: Patent Practice for Beginners

You’ve passed the patent bar exam. Now what? Having a license to practice is just the beginning. This is why Gene Quinn and John White designed …
By Gene Quinn
0 seconds 0

Showing ‘Meaningful Limits’ in Patent Claims

The USPTO’s 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance provides that if an abstract idea represented in one or more claim elements is integrated into a practical …
By Dennis Carleton
2 months ago 4

District of Delaware Makes it Harder to Corner the Market on Antibody Patents in MorphoSys v. Janssen

Patents covering an antibody are often claimed by the antibody’s function (the residues where it binds to the antigen) rather than its structure (amino-acid sequence). This …
By Zachary Silbersher
4 months ago 2

Abstractness is not the malleable concept the Supreme Court thinks

If the claim is directed to an abstract idea, then abstractness is an essential property of the claimed subject matter as a whole. As such, a claim …
By Peter Kramer
8 months ago 54

Federal Circuit Treatment of ‘Commercial Success’ in Hatch-Waxman Cases

In order to establish that the commercial success factor supports a non-obviousness finding, the patentee must establish that a connection (or nexus) exists between the novel aspects …
By Theodore Chiacchio
9 months ago 1

Software Patent-Eligible Subject Matter: Claiming Improvements in Computer Functionality

Particularize the claims.  This helps overcome the “abstract” part of a 101 rejection. Put details into the claims to define the steps performed in the software and hardware …
By G. Michael Roebuck
10 months ago 30

Which Invalidity Avenue to Take: Inter Partes Review Verses Post-Grant Review

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) provides invalidity tools via inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR), but which route is better? ...  PGRs are …
By Ryan Kenny
10 months ago 5

The Broadest Reasonable Claim Interpretation Cannot Exceed the Specification

TF3’s patent-in-suit is for a “hair styling device” that automated the curling of hair. TF3 appealed the decision of the Board in an IPR requested by …

The Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit, and the Patent Office Walk Out of an Appellate Review Bar: Changing Standards For Appellate Review of IPR Institution Decisions

This article reviews recent Federal Circuit and Supreme Court decisions addressing the scope of appellate review of institution of inter partes review (IPR) by the Patent Trial …

Denying Inducement to Infringe in Face of a Drug Label: A Fool’s Errand?

Proving inducement to infringe requires showing that the accused infringer possessed “specific intent” to infringe. In pharmaceutical cases, particularly those arising in the Hatch-Waxman framework, specific intent …

Patent Eligibility Determinations in Life Sciences Patent Cases

This article examines Supreme Court and Federal Circuit analyses of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 where the patent claims at issue were directed to Life Sciences-related …
By Theodore Chiacchio
11 months ago 3

USPTO issues guidance on patent eligibility of method of treatment claims in light of Vanda Pharmaceuticals

On June 7, 2018, the USPTO issued new guidance to its examining corps in the form of a memorandum discussing the Federal Circuit’s April 13, 2018 decision in Vanda Pharmaceuticals …
By John M. Rogitz
11 months ago 3

Patenting Antibodies: Written Description Considerations in Antibody Patents

The Amgen v. Sanofi decision put most functional antibody claims into question, including epitope and competitive binding claims, as well as antibody claims based on a newly …
By Li Feng & Stacy Lewis
1 year ago 2

USPTO Issues Guidance on Effects of Supreme Court’s Decision in SAS Institute on PTAB Trials

On Thursday, April 26th, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued new guidance regarding the effects of the U.S. Supreme Court’s judgment in SAS …
By Steve Brachmann
1 year ago 0

The CAFC Split Non-precedential Decision in Exergen v. Kaz Raises Interesting Issues About Eligibility Determinations

In Exergen Corporation v. Kaz USA, No. 16-2315 (March 8, 2018), the Federal Circuit, in a split non-precedential opinion, affirmed a holding that Exergen’s claims directed to methods …