Posts in IP News

This week on Other Barks & Bites: Vice Chief Administrative Patent Judge for the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Michael Kim says institution issued by Director John Squires will be a “thumbs up or down”; the Federal Circuit clarifies the meaning of “by another” from pre-America Invents Act Section 102 in the joint inventor context; President Donald Trump petitions the U.S. Supreme Court to stay the D.C. Circuit’s injunctive relief allowing Shira Perlmutter to return to her role as Register of Copyrights; and more.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision on Thursday, in part clarifying its precedent on the interpretation of “by others” or “by another” under pre-America Invents Act (AIA) 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(a), (e). The opinion was authored by Judge Linn. Merck Serono appealed two decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) holding claims of Merck’s U.S. Patent Nos. 7,713,947 and 8,377,903 unpatentable in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings brought by Hopewell Pharma Ventures. The Board found the claims unpatentable as obvious over a combination of two prior art references, “Bodor” and “Stelmasiak”.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced on Wednesday that it will be making it easier to develop biosimilar drugs in its ongoing effort to lower drug prices. The agency published draft guidance yesterday that recommended relaxing the requirements “to support a demonstration of biosimilarity in a biologics license application (BLA) submitted under section 351(k) of the Public Health Service (PHS) Act.”

Yesterday, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires sent a memo to all administrative patent judges (APJs) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) informing them that the agency was restoring the practice of requiring petitioners before the PTAB to identify all real parties in interest (RPI) prior to institution. The change is intended to address the exploitation of PTAB proceedings by foreign state-backed actors arising as an unintended consequence of less stringent RPI standards enforced by previous administrations.

On October 24, the National Weather Service Employees Organization (NWSEO) and the Patent Office Professional Association (POPA) filed a motion for a preliminary injunction in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that Executive Orders Nos. 14,251 and 14,343 unlawfully threaten employees’ rights to organize and bargain collectively, not on the basis of “legitimate ‘national security’ issues,” but to retaliate against unions such as NWSEO and POPA for their efforts to represent employees. The unions are asking the court to enjoin the application and enforcement of the executive orders while the case is litigated and requested a hearing for November 13.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we tackle the impact of tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty on intellectual property (IP) strategy, budgets and patent portfolios.  In today’s fast-paced global economy, intellectual property (IP) teams face unprecedented challenges and opportunities. The world is witnessing a flux of geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties, and rapid technological advancements, all of which demand agility and strategic foresight from IP professionals. Meanwhile, to complicate matters the United States is attempting to rearrange international business norms by diversifying supply chains for particularly important goods and components, while simultaneously aggressively using tariffs to change global economic behavior and settle international conflicts and wars. There is no doubt that this is a tumultuous time for all businesses, which demands attention, forethought and deliberate strategic action.

Howard Lutnick has been universally criticized by industry for his reported proposal to tax patent values and revenue share with universities. Howard Lutnick is absolutely right about the problem. Here’s why. The patent system was designed for individual inventors. Thomas Edison, the Wright brothers—these were lone entrepreneurs securing temporary monopoly rights in exchange for disclosing their inventions to the public. But sometime after World War II, corporations and universities completed a quiet takeover of the patent office. Today’s patent landscape is dominated by patent oligarchs: systematic corporate R&D programs filing thousands of applications annually, not individuals pursuing personal innovation.

A New York judge ruled on Monday that OpenAI cannot stop a consolidated, multi-district class action brought against by dozens of authors for direct copyright infringement by the outputs of its large language model (LLM), ChatGPT. OpenAI argued that the plaintiffs had failed to allege substantial similarity between the works and ChatGPT’s outputs, but Judge Sidney Stein of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York said  that “[a] more discerning observer could reasonably conclude that the allegedly infringing outputs are substantially similar to plaintiffs’ copyrighted works.”

On day one of IPWatchdog’s Life Sciences Masters 2025, panelists addressed a number of looming policy proposals that are negatively impacting the life sciences industry and urged stakeholders to get involved and speak out in order to minimize their effects. An introductory panel that included program sponsors Sherry Knowles of Knowles Intellectual Property Strategies and Robert Sahr of Wolf Greenfield, as well as Becky Kaufman of Ohio State University’s Office of Legal Affairs, discussed topics including Secretary of Commerce Howard Lutnick’s patent tax proposal and the administration’s threats to march in on federally-funded university patents.

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential ruling in Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp. affirming most of a non-infringement ruling entered by the District of Delaware over accused transcatheter heart valve products with balloon-expandable frames. Addressing challenges to the district court’s claim construction raised by Aortic, the Federal Circuit determined that the patentee acted as its own lexicographer for the claim term “outer frame” through consistent interchangeable uses of that term made in connection with specific embodiments disclosed in the specification.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a Federal Register Notice today launching the Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Program, an initiative designed to expedite patent examination by assessing how a limited number of claims affects pendency and examination quality. The USPTO stated that it “anticipates that focusing examination resources on already-filed, unexamined applications that have a streamlined claim set will enhance efforts to reduce the USPTO’s inventory and pendency.” Applications accepted into the pilot program will be “advanced out of turn (i.e., accorded special status) for examination until a first office action is issued.” After the first office action, the application will no longer be treated as special during examination.

Knobbe Martens is seeking a Patent Scientist – Computer Science/Electrical Engineering. Knobbe Martens provides an opportunity for engineers and scientists to further their professional growth and career development in exciting, challenging ways. Put your technical degree to work on issues involving science, technology, and the law. Candidates will assist with the successful procurement of patent protection for innovative technologies, evaluate the designs of new products, and assist with the evaluation of competitor products. Each client brings novel and diverse technologies to our firm. Therefore, candidates will learn about a variety of new technologies, learn to identify inventive features, learn to describe the inventions, and work with the Patent Office to allow a patent for the technology. The position also requires candidates to possess the ability to explain and describe new technologies in a way that is concise and descriptive.

In September 2025, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA), the highest judicial authority of the European Patent Office (EPO), issued its decision in G 2/24. The EBA addressed a procedural question: if a third party (an “intervener”) joins an ongoing appeal, can that party keep the case alive if all the original appellants withdraw? The EBA’s answer was a no. In other words, interveners play only a supporting role in appeal proceedings. They may join an existing appeal, but they cannot take over once the main participants have left the stage.

Representative Thomas Massie (R-KY) told US Inventors Conference attendees on Thursday that he will reintroduce the Restoring America’s Leadership in Innovation Act (RALIA). Massie first introduced RALIA in 2021. The bill would repeal the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR;) return the patent system to a “first-to-invent” model, rather than first-to-file, and would end automatic publication of patents. Inventor groups such as US Inventor and conservative groups have supported the legislation.