Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

IPR Estoppel: The Present and the Future Image

IPR Estoppel: The Present and the Future

John P. Isacson

IPRs have now been conducted for several years, and litigation has ensued over the procedures by which they are conducted. Decisions have been rendered by the U.S. Supreme Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which have resolved some issues, created others, and altered procedures.

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Jeff Ginsberg & Zhiqiang Liu

Federal Circuit Declines to Follow Patent Office's Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance In Affirming Trial Court's Decision That Claims Are Directed to Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter

Features

When Alice Leaves Software in Wonderland: Review the Terms of Use Image

When Alice Leaves Software in Wonderland: Review the Terms of Use

Veronica Mullally Munoz 

That least-read contract — the Terms of Use — can be an effective (albeit the last) weapon in the arsenal of a company trying to protect unpatented software technology while providing on-line services.

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Jeffrey S. Ginsberg

SCOTUS Confirms that Secret Sales Continue to Qualify as Prior Art Under the AIA<br>New York District Judge Extends Estoppel Under §315(e) to Grounds Not Raised in Petition for <i>Inter Partes</i> Review

Features

The USPTO Brings New Guidance to the Section 101 Quandary Image

The USPTO Brings New Guidance to the Section 101 Quandary

Susan M. Gerber & A. Patricia Campbell

<b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</b></i><p>USPTO Attempts to Provide Greater Clarity for Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

Features

Patent Eligibility Remains Uncertain — Especially for the Life Sciences — Even After Recent Federal Circuit Decisions and Efforts By the USPTO to Bring Clarity Image

Patent Eligibility Remains Uncertain — Especially for the Life Sciences — Even After Recent Federal Circuit Decisions and Efforts By the USPTO to Bring Clarity

Susan M. Gerber & A. Patricia Campbell

Part One of a Two-Part Article Congress is empowered to create a patent system to promote the useful arts, and it has enacted laws to create a patent system that encourages innovation. Balancing that power, however, the courts in recent years have tried to rein in the scope of the patent right by limiting the scope of patent-eligible subject matter.

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Jeff Ginsberg & Hui Li

Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Does Not Invalidate Section 156 Patent Term Extension <br>Federal Circuit Holds Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in IPR Context<br>Federal Circuit Reverses District Court Holding of Patent Ineligibility of Computer Security Patent

Features

Further Guidance On Article III Standing To Appeal PTAB Decisions Coming Soon Image

Further Guidance On Article III Standing To Appeal PTAB Decisions Coming Soon

Lewis R. Clayton & Eric Alan Stone

How, if at all, can a non-injured party that challenges a patent before the PTAB and loses may then demonstrate Article III standing to appeal to the federal courts from the PTAB's decision upholding the patent's validity.

Features

The PTAB's New Claim Construction Standard: Will the Real Impact Please Stand Up Image

The PTAB's New Claim Construction Standard: Will the Real Impact Please Stand Up

Justin Oliver

Beginning on Nov. 13, 2018, the USPTO will cease to apply the broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI) standard for newly-filed IPR, PGR, and CBM trials under the America Invents Act (AIA). Instead, the USPTO will begin "using the same claim construction standard that would be used to construe the claim in a civil action …."

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Jeff Ginsberg & George Soussou

Obviousness Determination Can Be Different for Apparatus and Method Claims<br>Petitioner “Bears the Burden” On Demonstrating Real Parties in Interest

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Delaware Chancery Court Takes Fresh Look At Zone of Insolvency
    Over a decade ago, a Delaware Chancery Court's footnote in <i>Credit Lyonnais Bank Nederland, N.V. v. Pathe Communications</i>, 1991 WL 277613 (Del. Ch. 1991), established the "zone of insolvency" as something to be feared by directors and officers and served as a catalyst for countless creditor lawsuits. Claims by creditors committee and trustees against directors and officers for breach of fiduciary duties owed to creditors have since become commonplace. But in a decision that may have equally great repercussion both in the Boardroom and in bankruptcy cases, the Delaware Chancery Court has revisited zone-of-insolvency case law and limited this ever-expanding legal theory.
    Read More ›
  • The Right to Associate in the Defense
    The "right to associate" permits the insurer to work with the insured to investigate, defend, or settle a claim. Such partnerships protect the insurer and can prove beneficial to the insured's underlying case and ultimate exposure.
    Read More ›