The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today denied Apple’s petition for a writ of mandamus asking for a writ of mandamus to compel Judge Alan Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to transfer its case to the Northern District of California.Carbyne Biometrics sued Apple for infringement of six patents via Apple’s “Secure Enclave” and Apple Cash platform features. Apple moved for transfer in July 2023, the motion was briefed in November 2023 and the district court denied the motion in December 2023 and said it would soon issue a decision. Apple filed the petition for writ of mandamus when no decision had issued by January 31, 2024 asking the CAFC to either stay the proceedings until a decision had issued or to compel transfer.
If you are on LinkedIn, you undoubtedly get messages, perhaps daily, from some service provider that you don’t know who promises to be able to help you with some pain point. Unfortunately for those marketers who do not take the time to do even basic research, these inquiries often come off as rather pathetic and do little more than demonstrate that you certainly don’t want to work with them, ever. Seriously, if they can’t even read your LinkedIn profile to see what type of work you do, are you really going to trust them with something that matters?
The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday, March 18, denied a petition filed by patent owner Jodi A. Schwendimann asking the Court to review a decision of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) that affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) determination that Schwendimann’s patents were obvious. The petition specifically asked the Court to review the CAFC’s holding that Schwendimann’s argument that “justification for selection of a primary reference is a necessary step to guard against hindsight bias for the motivation to combine references” was unsupported by Federal Circuit case law.
On March 13, the European Parliament approved the Artificial Intelligence (AI) Act, a major piece of legislation that lays the legal foundation of the European Union’s (EU) regulation of AI platforms. While the 459-page bill addresses some of the copyright and other intellectual property (IP) issues related to generative AI, European creator groups have called upon the EU’s parliamentary body to create more meaningful mechanisms for IP rightsholders to prevent their works from being incorporated into AI platform training models. Further, questions have been raised regarding the extraterritorial impact of reporting requirements and how they might implicate the development of copyright law in foreign jurisdictions.
We are less than 24 hours out from 2024 and, after reflecting on what mattered in 2023 and other year-in-review recaps, it is now time once again to ponder what lies ahead. From exciting patent legislation to Supreme Court trademark and copyright cases that could have big implications, here is what the IPWatchdog community will be keeping on its radar in the new year.
The most significant development in IP in Europe in 2023—indeed arguably the most significant in nearly 30 years—was the launch of the Unitary Patent and Unified Patent Court on June 1. The full implications of this are explored here. Beyond the UP and UPC, however, there were a number of. important developments in Europe affecting all the main IP rights.
On December 27, less than one week before the National Hockey League’s (NHL) Seattle Kraken defeated the Vegas Golden Knights in the 2024 Winter Classic, a lawsuit was filed in the Western District of Washington against the Kraken. The lawsuit alleges that Seattle’s NHL franchise wore an infringing jersey during the Winter Classic, and has sold infringing merchandise, after shutting out the legitimate business interests of a passionate Seattle-area fan who revived that city’s championship legacy more than 90 years after the previous franchise folded.
Arnold & Porter is seeking an Engineering Patent Agent for the Intellectual Property practice group. This position is full-time and permanent and may be located in the following offices: Boston, Chicago, Denver, Houston, Los Angeles, New York, San Francisco, Silicon Valley, or Washington DC. The Patent Agent works with Patent Attorneys to secure patents by preparing, filing, and prosecuting applications involving new inventions with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Friday affirmed a district court finding that two inventors should be added as co-inventors to a patent for a method of transporting gaseous fluids. The CAFC concluded that the record “does not leave us with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made” in finding the inventors contributed significantly to the invention.
Leveque Intellectual Property Law, P.C., one of America’s oldest continuously-operated patent practices founded and operated by a woman patent attorney, is seeking a registered U.S. patent attorney, preferably with a proven track record in patenting software, artificial intelligence (AI), convolutional network, medical devices, and other electrical technologies. Ideal candidates will have at least 10 years of recent experience in all aspects of utility and design patent drafting and prosecution practice; managing international patent prosecution of patent portfolios; analyzing and summarizing patent searches, drafting legal opinions, including patentability, validity, infringement and freedom-to-operate. The ideal candidate will also have recent experience providing IP clients with trademark, trade secret and copyrights guidance as well as drafting transactional and licensing agreements. This is a hybrid position with flexible hours. The ideal candidate will be available to work in our office in downtown Frederick, Maryland as needed. Full-time and part-time positions are available.
This week in Other Barks & Bites: OpenAI faces another lawsuit, this time from two journalists alleging copyright infringement; the International Trade Commission (ITC) makes its case before the CAFC to reimpose an import ban on Apple Watches; and OpenAI tells the UK government that it could not make ChatGPT without copyrighted material.
On December 28, agricultural tech developer Inari filed an amicus brief with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) urging the appellate court to deny a petition for rehearing en banc of the court’s August ruling in In re Cellect. Inari’s brief highlights that the Federal Circuit’s application of the obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) doctrine to legislatively-prescribed patent term adjustments (PTA) is critical to the success of companies like Inari who build upon technologies once patent protections expire.
On day one of the new year, we continue the IPWatchdog tradition of asking readers what they would like to see happen if their every IP wish could come true. Some commenters stuck with more realistic asks, such as for patent eligibility reform to move forward or that an extension of the waiver of IP rights under the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement (TRIPS) will be opposed. Others went out on a limb by pulling for a new central patent court based in Hawaii or that congress will get its act together, for instance. Of course, the most popular dream articulated below is once again that patent eligibility certainty will be restored, either by the courts or congress.
This is the best way to stay informed. We send a daily roundup of our latest news, press releases, and events.
Get Email Updates