Analysis of patent litigation, PTAB practice, prosecution and pharma IP, written on the data behind LexDana.
Tagged intellectual property law · clear
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS v. L’ORÉAL S.A. Before Prost, Mayer, and Taranto . Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: In claims of two patents regarding skin enhancement, the recited concentration…
TIGER LILY VENTURES LTD. v. BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. Before Lourie , Bryson, and Prost. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : A trademark associated with a bankrupt company was not abandoned…
Attribution to: Published in Landslide , Vol. 14, No. 3, March/April 2022, by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. It’s hard to be a fashion innovator. It’s far easier to be an imitator. Success…
PAVO SOLUTIONS LLC v. KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC. Before: Lourie, Prost , and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary : A court can correct obvious minor typographical or clerical errors in…
ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. Before Moore , Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : During vacancies of Director and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the Commissioner of Patents may…
Back in 2021, a Stanford University team of scientists made headlines as they managed to reverse engineer the Moderna Covid-19 vaccine from just drops in discarded vials. The team determined the sequence of the mRNA for the vaccine and later posted it on…
Tomorrow we will release our second annual Trademark Prosecution Intelligence Report. The report focuses on trademarks filed in the last five years, from January 1, 2017 through December 31, 2021. During this period, a total of 2,848,988 trademarks were…
KAUFMAN v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION Before Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the Southern District of New York Summary: An “automatic” method does not require all steps in the method to be performed without user input and…
MITEK SYS., INC. V. UNITED SERVS. AUTO. ASS’N Before Dyk, Taranto, and Cunningham. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: Declaratory judgment plaintiffs must identify particular facts supporting standing and…
GOOGLE LLC v. IPA TECHNOLOGIES INC. Before Dyk, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: For purposes of determining whether a reference was prior art, the Board has an obligation to resolve fundamental testimonial…
ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY v. BENNETT REGULATOR GUARDS, INC. Before Newman, Lourie, and Stoll Summary: Termination decision made by the Board in part based on the time-bar was “intimately related” to the institution decision, and therefore not…
SOUND VIEW INNOVATIONS, LLC v. HULU, LLC Before Prost, Mayer, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: It was improper to find a claim limitation was missing without affirmatively construing…
