Section » Featured
USPTO PROPOSES AMENDING RULE 1.56 TO DEFINE MATERIALITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THERASENSE
On July 21, 2011 the USPTO published a notice of proposed rulemaking to amend Rule 56 (37 CFR §1.56) to define materiality in accordance with the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in as the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., — F.3d. — (Fed. Cir. 2011). A similar amendment is proposed
More Articles
Launch of .XXX Domain Names – Blocking Registration of Trademarks as Domains
Summary: This September, the new .XXX registry will begin accepting registrations and protection against registrations, that is, requests to block registration of non-adult industry trademarks as domains (example: blocking registration of HDP.xxx). As with most extension launches, applications will be
Does the Federal Circuit “mean” it this time? Adding confusion to when claim language lacking the word “means” should be subject to means-plus-function analysis.
Inventio AG v. ThyssenKrupp Elevators Americas Corp., No. 2010-1525 (Fed. Cir. June 15, 2011). The Federal Circuit long ago answered whether a functional claim term that lacked structure should be analyzed as a means-plus-function limitation, even if the word “means” is missing. “Of course,”
A possibility among a limited number is not necessarily a predictable solution; teaching away need not be specific.
Spectralytics, Inc. v. Cordis Corporation, Nos. 2009-1564, 2010-1004 (Fed. Cir. June 13, 2011). This decision’s treatment of an accused infringer’s “teaching away” and “predictable solution” arguments is of interest, as are the court’s comments in remanding for reconsideration of award
Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, U.S., No. 10-290 (June 9, 2011).
The Supreme Court unanimously upheld a clear and convincing standard for proving a patent invalid, whether or not the evidence had been considered by the patent examiner. Before the Patent Act of 1952, the Court required clear and convincing evidence of invalidity. Radio Corp. of America v. Radio Engineering
Stanford v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc.
Stanford v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., 563 U.S. — (2011), the Supreme Court, in its second patent case in a week, held that the Bayh-Dole Act does not automatically vest title to federally-funded inventions in federal contractors or authorize contractors to unilaterally take title to such inventions.
Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB SA – The Supreme Court Addresses Inducement of Patent Infringement
In Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB SA, the Supreme Court held that inducement of infringement under 35 USC 271(B) requires knowledge that the induced acts constitute patent infringement. This means that the alleged inducer must know (1) that the patent exists and (2) that the induced acts constitute
Therasense’s Stringent Inequitable Conduct Test
Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson and Co., Nos. 2008-1511, -1512, -1513, -1514, -1595 (Fed. Cir. May 25, 2011). Determined to end overuse of inequitable conduct charges, the en banc Therasense court tightened the doctrine, abolishing the “sliding scale” rule and requiring an accused infringer
TTAB: Prompt Filing of Supplemental Response Cures Procedural Deficiency in Expert Disclosures
TTAB: Prompt Filing of Supplemental Response Cures Procedural Deficiency in Expert Disclosures The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) held that Respondent’s timely-filed expert testimony should not be excluded for procedural deficiencies when those deficiencies were promptly corrected before
Providing Support for Generous Construction of a Claimed Range
Lexion Medical, LLC v. Northgate Technologies, Inc., 2009-1494 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 22, 2011). Writing for the court, Chief Judge Rader handed patent prosecutors a checklist for getting the most out of a numerical range. First, “[t]his court prefers a claim interpretation that harmonizes the various elements