Posts Tagged: patentability requirements
High Court is Poised to Un-Muddy the Section 101 Waters Nearly Seven Years After Alice
Could the United States Supreme Court once again weigh in on Section 101 subject-matter eligibility? With the Court having asked for the views of the Solicitor General yesterday, …
CAFC Clarifies Section 103 Prior Art Enablement Requirement, Reverses PTAB Obviousness Finding
Last week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reversed an inter partes review (IPR) decision from the U.S. Patent and Trademark …
In re Stanford: Ruined by a Processor and a Memory
Computer boilerplate – such as including “a processor and a memory” in claims – is commonplace in patent applications. However, the recent case of In re Stanford shows that …
International IP Index 2021: United States Remains Second in Patent Rankings, Global IP Framework Holds Strong Amid Pandemic
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC) released its ninth annual International IP Index yesterday, finding that the United States, Japan and Europe …
Tillis and Cotton Urge Hirshfeld to Adopt Pilot Program to Address ‘Inherently Vague and Subjective’ Eligibility Analyses
Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Tom Cotton (R-AR) sent a letter on Monday to the acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), Drew …
Patenting Simulations at the EPO: Decision G1/19 and Its Consequences for Computer-Implemented Inventions
The Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO) recently published its decision No. G1/19 on patentability of simulations. There was great anticipation for such …
CAFC Affirms PTAB Rejection of Stanford Haplotype Phasing Patent Claims Under Alice
On March 11, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to hold the …
What to Know About the European Patent Office 2021 Guidelines for Examination: Part II – Biotech
As discussed in Part I of this article, the European Patent Office (EPO) recently published its Guidelines for Examination 2021, which came into force on March 1. In the …
CAFC Weighs in Again on IPR Joinder Estoppel, Affirms PTAB Holding that Uniloc Patent Claims are Obvious
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled yesterday in Uniloc v. Facebook, Inc., WhatsApp, Inc. that the “no appeal” provision of 35 U.…
Balancing Innovation and Competition: Thomas Jefferson’s View of Obviousness for Mechanical Inventions
You cannot get a patent for an invention if it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time. This …
Professors Tell SCOTUS to Correct the CAFC’s ‘Profound Misunderstanding’ in American Axle Case
In one of six amicus briefs filed this week in American Axle & Manufacturing v. Neapco Holdings, LLC—the closely-watched Section 101 patent eligibility case involving driveshaft automotive technology—…
How to Safeguard AI Technology: Patents versus Trade Secrets
A common refrain is that an invention is only as valuable as the patent that protects it. But what happens when you cannot secure the patent? This …
Dyk Splits from CAFC Panel on Application of Collateral Estoppel to Inter Partes Reexaminations
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Monday held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) incorrectly found certain claims of …
CAFC Reverses In-Part, Vacates In-Part PTAB Patentability Finding for Skin Cancer Detection Device
On February 18, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential opinion in an appeal by Canfield Scientific, Inc. (Canfield) from the …
CAFC Affirms Section 112 Invalidation/ Non-Infringement in Synchronoss v. Dropbox Dispute
On February 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a district court’s conclusion of invalidity under Section 112 and/or non-infringement in …
