Posts in IP News

Other Barks & Bites for Friday, April 10: USPTO Touts Reduced Backlog; Fifth Circuit Awards Google Transfer on Mandamus; and Third Circuit Says Online Publication of Copyrighted Building Codes is Transformative

This week in Other Barks and Bites: the EU’s GPAI Signatory Taskforce convenes a second meeting to focus on copyright issues like mitigating infringing AI outputs; Meta and CoreWeave extend their AI cloud partnership through 2032 with a new deal worth $21 billion; and more.

WIPO is Seeking a Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) External Consultant

WIPO is seeking a Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) External Consultant. WIPO aims to significantly expand the use of the PCT system compared to the Paris Convention in the United States of America. To achieve this, WIPO will engage an external contractor for a time-bound consultancy assignment to actively promote and drive the adoption of the PCT system within the user community.

Professors Push Back in Review of PTAB Rehearing Decision on ODP

Amicus briefs have now been posted to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) site in Ex Parte Baurin, a 2025 rehearing decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) with respect to obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) that is being reviewed by an Appeals Review Panel (ARP). While most of the amici are arguing in favor of the Board’s analysis, one brief submitted by Professors Mark Lemley and Lisa Larrimore Oullette contends that U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) precedent supports the examiner’s rejections and that Allergan’s holding is inapplicable here.

CAFC Affirms TTAB Finding of No Likelihood of Confusion Between Vape and Cigar Marks

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision Wednesday in Fuente Marketing Ltd. v. Vaporous Technologies, LLC, affirming the decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) and holding that the Board correctly dismissed an opposition to a trademark application after finding no likelihood of confusion between the applied-for mark and registered marks.

Arnold & Porter is Seeking a Senior Manager of IP Prosecution

Arnold & Porter is a leading international law firm with offices across the United States, Europe, and Asia. The firm delivers sophisticated regulatory, litigation, and transactional services to clients across a wide range of industries. Arnold & Porter is seeking a Senior Manager of IP Prosecution to join its Washington, DC office. This role provides firmwide leadership for the Intellectual Property Prosecution function, overseeing patent and trademark operations and ensuring the delivery of efficient, high-quality support to attorneys and clients.

DOJ Again Pushes Back Against Antitrust Claims Filed Over Allegations of SEP Abuse, False RAND Promises

Yesterday, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a statement of interest (SOI) in an ongoing patent infringement case between consumer electronics giant Samsung and memory systems developer Netlist, which includes counterclaims by Samsung for violations of U.S. antitrust law. The SOI reiterates arguments made by the DOJ in other litigation involving standard essential patents (SEPs), asking the court to render its decision on Samsung’s antitrust claims in accordance with the fact that inclusion in a technical standard does not create a presumption that patent rights create market power.

USPTO Stats Show IPR Institution Rate Has Plummeted by 43%

During its latest “USPTO Hour” webinar, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recapped Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) updates over the last year-plus, including statistics that show drastic changes in the overall institution rate and number of denials of institution for inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. According to the USPTO’s figures (see chart below), in October 2024 the average institution rate was around 65%, whereas in February 2026 the overall institution rate was around 37%.

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Decision Finding Information Exchange Patent Application Claim Ineligible Under Section 101

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision Tuesday in In re Brian McFadden affirming a decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The CAFC determined that the PTAB correctly found claim 14 of Brian David McFadden’s patent application directed to ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court agreed that “claim 14 does not contain an inventive concept sufficient to transform this abstract idea into a patent-eligible application.” Since the court affirmed the ineligibility determination, it concluded that it “need not reach anticipation” under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

CAFC Says Appellant Declaration Failed to Tie Planned Product Features to Challenged Substitute Claims

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in ironSource Ltd. v. Digital Turbine, Inc. dismissing Israeli software developer ironSource’s appeal of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision to grant mobile app tech developer Digital Turbine’s revised motion to amend patent claims challenged by ironSource in post-grant review (PGR) proceedings. The opinion, authored by Chief Judge Moore, determined that ironSource lacked Article III standing to pursue its appeal because it failed to establish an injury in fact based on Digital Turbine’s veiled threats that its patent claims covered aspects of discontinued ironSource products.

Patent Monetization: Markets, Misaligned Incentives, and the AI Inflection Point | IPWatchdog Unleashed

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, my conversation with patent broker Louis Carbonneau centers on a fundamental breakdown in the economic engine that has historically driven innovation. While innovation itself has not disappeared, the incentive structure that once enabled a repeatable cycle—innovate, patent, monetize, reinvest—has eroded. Large market participants increasingly operate under a “use now, pay later (if ever)” model, which disproportionately disadvantages individual inventors and smaller entities. As a result, many innovators are unable to sustain continued development beyond an initial breakthrough, leading to a systemic drag on long-term innovation output. This shift is reinforced by a broader cultural normalization of “free” access to intellectual property, which has migrated from the copyright into the patent and innovation industry.

Federal Circuit Affirms ITC Refusal to Block Import of Marine Air Conditioner Products

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Dometic Corp. v. International Trade Commission, affirming a final determination that Citimarine, L.L.C., and other intervenors did not violate Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The CAFC determined that the United States International Trade Commission (ITC) correctly concluded that Dometic Corp. and Dometic Sweden AB failed to prove a violation through the import of certain marine air conditioning systems. The court affirmed the ITC finding that several claims of the asserted patent are invalid for anticipation and that the accused products do not infringe the remaining claims.

SCOTUS Says Fifth Circuit Must Reconsider Contributory Infringement Ruling for Record Labels after Cox v. Sony

The U.S. Supreme Court today granted certiorari to a petition brought by internet service provider (ISP) Grande Communications Networks LLC, appealing from a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit decision that upheld a jury verdict holding Grande Communications liable for contributory infringement against a group of major U.S. record labels. The Supreme Court granted certiorari and then vacated the judgment and remanded the case to the Fifth Circuit for reconsideration under the Court’s recent opinion in Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sony Music Entertainment.

Navigating Recent Developments in Generative AI and Trade Secret Protection

Two recent federal district court decisions highlight the significant risks of sharing confidential information with a generative AI platform. In Trinidad v. OpenAI, the court dismissed the plaintiff’s trade secret claims under the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA) because the plaintiff had voluntarily disclosed her allegedly proprietary frameworks to OpenAI while using ChatGPT to create them.Then, Judge Rakoff in United States v. Heppner held that documents created using publicly available generative AI are not protected by the attorney-client privilege—in part because communications memorialized through an AI platform are not confidential when the platform is not contractually bound to keep them secret.

Other Barks & Bites for Friday, April 3: Trump EO Sets 100% Tariffs on Patent Pharmaceutical Imports; Squires Vacates TikTok IPRs Under Tianma Microelectronics; and Kallay Voices DOJ’s Preference for FRAND Obligations

This week in Other Barks & Bites: the Federal Circuit rules that the omission of a co-inventor from a patent invalidates those patent claims if inventorship cannot be corrected; President Donald Trump signs an executive order placing 100% tariffs on drug companies who do not onshore production of patented pharmaceuticals; and more.

Federal Circuit Upholds District Court’s View That Omission of Coinventor Invalidates Patent

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), with Judge Lourie writing, issued a precedential decision today affirming a district court’s grant of summary judgment holding two patents invalid for omitting a coinventor. Fortress Iron LP owns U.S. Patents 9,790,707 (“the ’707 patent”) and 10,883,290, which are both titled “Vertical Cable Rail Barrier.” The final designs for the inventions covered by the two patents were conceived by two Fortress employees and two employees of Fortress’ quality control liaison, Quan Zhou Yoddex Building Material Co., Ltd (YD).

Varsity Sponsors

Industry Events

PIUG 2026 Joint Annual and Biotechnology Conference
May 19 @ 8:00 am - May 21 @ 5:00 pm EDT
Certified Patent Valuation Analyst Training
May 28 @ 9:00 am - May 29 @ 5:00 pm EDT
2026 WIPO-U.S. Summer School on Intellectual Property
June 1 @ 9:00 am - June 12 @ 1:45 pm EDT

From IPWatchdog