61 articles · page 2 of 6
Are you familiar with Andy Warhol’s artwork? Fondly referred to as the “Pope of pop art,” Andy Warhol became famous with his silkscreen prints of distinctly American objects, celebrities, or advertisements repainted with different colors.…
When Apple and Qualcomm finally settled their dispute back in 2019, eyebrows were raised given that the licensing agreement had a six-year limit and that Apple didn't include the ongoing PTAB proceedings in the settlement agreement. Earlier this month,…
Amidst growing concerns that China is eclipsing the U.S. with R&D and patents in emerging new technologies, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee's Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Senator Thom R. Tillis announced a couple of weeks ago a…
A medical device patentee has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to save his design patent, related to an introducer sheath handle, from invalidity based on application of the “on-sale” bar, which prohibits patenting an invention if it has been for…
Introduction The Mayo/Alice subject-matter eligibility test has been a controversial topic since its creation. Many have argued that it leaves innovators, particularly in the software field, with uncertainty as to whether their advances are patentable. In…
The U.S. Supreme Court recently decided a case resolving a patent dispute between two medical device companies, Hologic, Inc. and Minerva Surgical . The opinion was closely watched because it raised the question of whether an inventor who has assigned a…
MINERVA SURGICAL, INC. v. HOLOGIC, INC., et al. Supreme Court of the United States. Opinion of the Court written by Justice Kagan. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Barrett filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch.…
NEW SUPREME COURT RULING Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. , et al, No. 20-440 (S. Ct. June 29, 2021) The Supreme Court issued a decision today upholding the validity of the doctrine of assignor estoppel and clarifying its proper limits. The Court…
U.S. v. Arthrex, Inc. Before the United States Supreme Court. Majority opinion by Chief Justice Roberts. On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Summary: A statute preventing the PTO Director from reviewing IPR…
NEW SUPREME COURT RULING United States v. Arthrex, Inc., et al , Appeal No. 2019-1434 (Fed. Cir. June 21, 2021) The Supreme Court issued its long-awaited decision today on the constitutionality of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The Court held…
ROMAG FASTENERS, INC. v. FOSSIL, INC. Before the Supreme Court of the United States. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Summary: Trademark owners are not required to show willfulness as a precondition to an…
SCOTUS Clarifies PTAB Institution Issues Not Subject to Appeal Back In December I pointed out that the SCOTUS would likely tighten the PTAB appeal bar in Dex Media Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies, LP, explaining that, based on the oral argument, that…
