December 8, 2016

The CAFC recently held that arguments in a Patent Owner’s Preliminary Statement must be reiterated during an IPR’s trial phase to preserve them for appeal.  In re NuVasive, Inc, Case No. 2015-1670 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, 2016).

When Medtronic petitioned for inter partes revi...

November 22, 2016

In Unwired Planet LLC v. Google, No. 2015-1812, (Fed. Cir. Nov. 21, 2016), the CAFC overruled a PTAB decision that opened CBM review to a much wider range of patents than contemplated by the AIA statute.   CBM review is supposed to be available only for patents directe...

August 12, 2016

In the two months since the Supreme Court rejected the “Seagate Test” for enhanced patent damages (Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics, 136 S. Ct. 1923 (2016) (“Halo”), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) has rendered three decisions under Halo.

  1. ...

June 20, 2016

The Supreme Court recently ruled that enhanced damages for patent infringement (35 U.S.C §284) are a matter for the trial court’s discretion that will be reviewed on appeal only for an abuse of discretion.  Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics, Case No. 14-1513 (June...

February 24, 2016

In PPC Broadband, Inc. v. Corning Optical Communications RF, LLC, Case No. 2015-1364 (February 22, 2016), the Federal Circuit vacated another PTAB final decision that construed claim terms without properly considering the patent’s specification.

The patent at issue rela...

January 14, 2016

The CAFC has held that it is constitutional for the same PTAB judges who institute an inter partes review to also make the final decision on patentability.  Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc. v. Covidien LP, No. 2014-1771 (Fed. Cir. January 13, 2016).  The Patent Owner, E...

January 7, 2016

The CAFC recently affirmed a PTAB decision that rejected supplemental evidence submitted by an IPR Petitioner.  Redline Detection, LLC  v. Star Envirotech, Inc., No. 2015-1047 (Fed. Cir. December 31, 2015).  This is another instance where the PTAB has excluded evidence...

December 5, 2015

In a recent CAFC decision, Judge Newman complains in her dissent that the “purpose of post-grant review is not to stack the deck against the patentee,” thus accusing the PTAB and CAFC of doing just that.  (Prolitec, Inc. v. Scentair Technologies, Inc., Case No. 2014, (...

November 27, 2015

The CAFC recently overruled a PTAB claim construction that altered the plain meaning of unambiguous claim language in an attempt to align the claim with an excerpt from the specification. Straight Path IP Group, Inc. v. Sipnet EU S.R.O., Case No. 2015 (F...

November 19, 2015

 

The CAFC’s recent decision in Arioso Diagnostics v. Verinata Health, Inc., Nos. 2015-1215, 2015-1226 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 16, 2015) contains some worthwhile reminders for IPR Petitioners. First, it confirms the role of “background art” in a Petition:  Such “art can legitim...

Please reload

Recent Posts
Please reload

Archive
Please reload

CHAO HADIDI STARK AND BARKER LLP

Silicon Valley Office • (650) 325-0220

Boston Office • (774) 571-3513