Posts in IP News

Patent Bots is a SaaS company built by patent attorneys, for patent attorneys. Our tools help IP professionals at some of the world’s top firms and corporations work smarter, from drafting and prosecution to examiner analytics and prior art research. We’re a small team with a big footprint in the IP world, and we’re looking for a Product Specialist to be the human face of our product for attorneys who are already knocking on our door. Patent attorneys and IP professionals will come to you curious, evaluating, or mid-trial, and your job is to turn that curiosity into confidence. You’ll run demos, answer hard product questions, and help prospects figure out whether Patent Bots is the right fit for their practice.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision today in Otsuka America Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Hetero Labs Limited, affirming a preliminary injunction that blocks Hetero Labs Limited from launching a generic version of the neurological drug Nuedexta. The court also vacated a district court order that had excused Otsuka from posting a bond pending appeal, remanding the issue for further proceedings. Circuit Judge Dyk dissented in part from the majority’s claim construction and would have reversed the injunction.

Most patent attorneys know the Jerome Lemelson story—the prolific inventor whose aggressive use of continuation and continuation-in-part applications resulted in some patents remaining pending for decades, earning the label of “submarine patents.” While Lemelson’s tactics sparked controversy and eventual legislative reforms aimed at curbing undue delays, one principle emerged clearly from his experiences: new matter in patent law must receive a new priority date…. To patent applicants, 35 U.S.C. § 132(a) means that the detailed description of their non-provisional patent applications must be perfect when filed, and that even if new information is discovered after filing, no changes can be made. In practice, this is an extremely harsh standard, and is disproportionately punitive to small business inventors who lack the deep pockets to absorb repeated filing costs and years of delay.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), in a Per Curiam opinion, today affirmed a Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) ruling that the mark MON AMI is confusingly similar to the previously registered mark, AMÌ, and that MON AMI could therefore not be registered.

Following the U.S. Supreme Court’s closely watched decisions in Trump v. Slaughter and Trump v. Cook, which together clarified the scope of presidential authority to remove certain federal officials from office, the Court today denied the Trump Administration’s request to stay a lower court order temporarily restoring Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter to office while her challenge to her removal proceeds in court. The Court emphasized, however, that “[t]he denial of the application is not a ruling on the merits of the legal issues presented in the litigation,” leaving the substantive dispute for a later day.

On the same day it granted a trademark petition, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in a number of patent cases as its term nears an end, including the closely-watched case of Hyatt v. Squires, which challenged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s (CAFC’s) approach to the doctrine of prosecution laches. In addition to the Hyatt case, the Court also denied cert today in Finesse Wireless LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, et. al.; Polar Electro Oy v. Firstbeat Technologies Oy; and Ortiz & Assoc. Consulting, LLC v. Vizio, Inc.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a petition for writ of certiorari filed by nitro cold brew coffee company RiseandShine Corporation, doing business as RISE Brewing, challenging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit’s application of the likelihood of confusion test in RiseandShine’s trademark infringement case against PepsiCo’s “Mtn DEW Rise Energy” energy drinks. Going against the U.S. Solicitor General’s calls to deny cert even though the Second Circuit erred in treating a trademark’s inherent strength as a question of law, the Supreme Court will answer whether this sub-factor of the consumer confusion analysis presents questions of fact that should be submitted to a jury.

ArentFox Schiff LLP is seeking a patent agent or patent attorney with a minimum of five years of experience preparing and prosecuting patent applications in the biotechnology field at a law firm. The ideal candidate will have substantial experience drafting patent applications directed to in vitro diagnostic assays, along with familiarity in one or more of the following areas: immunoassays, CRISPR-based assays, nucleic acid sequencing and quantification, and related probes, kits, and reagents. Experience with computational biology is a plus but is not required. This position will be based in the firm’s San Francisco or New York office. Ideal candidates will hold an M.S. or Ph.D. in molecular biology or a closely related discipline. Candidates who do not hold a graduate degree, but who possess a B.S. in a relevant field combined with five or more years of post-graduate laboratory or industry experience will also be considered.

Last week, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires issued a decision denying institution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings petitioned by tech giant Apple to challenge patent rights owned by WeCrevention, the intellectual property holding subsidiary of Taiwanese semiconductor developer Etron Technology. Director Squires’ ruling continues the ongoing crackdown against gamesmanship at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) by petitioners pursuing positions inconsistent with district court litigation to increase their odds of invalidating competitor patent rights.

This week in Other Barks & Bites: public interest groups voice their opposition to the PRO CODES Act for allowing private ownership of code standards incorporated by reference into public law; the Eleventh Circuit reverses the Middle District of Florida for failing to consider evidence of non-generic use in a cheerleading competition trademark case; the Federal Trade Commission files an amicus brief arguing that no specific intent is required to show that Johnson & Johnson’s patent acquisitions were anticompetitive; the European Patent Office publishes a study analyzing dozens of landmark cases on licensing rate determinations for standards-essential patents; and more.

Wenderoth, Lind & Ponack, LLP, an intellectual property law firm in Washington, DC, is seeking an experienced patent attorney to join its thriving Chemical and Biotechnology Patent Prosecution Practice. This position offers the opportunity to work on a wide variety of patent prosecution matters in the biological, biotechnology, chemical, and pharmaceutical fields for sophisticated domestic and international clients. The Biotechnology Patent Prosecution Attorney will focus on preparing, filing, and prosecuting U.S. and international patent applications in biotechnology and related life sciences technologies. The attorney will work closely with experienced colleagues in a collegial and team-oriented environment while maintaining efficient prosecution practices and upholding the firm’s standards for quality, responsiveness, and client service. This is a full-time, hybrid role based in Washington, D.C., with flexibility for remote work.

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) has materially changed how examiners are instructed to apply the law on patentable subject matter. In March 2026, CIPO replaced its November 2020 practice notice on computer-implemented inventions, medical diagnostic methods, and medical uses. The 2026 notice represents an important development for current Canadian prosecution practice.

The United States Senate Committee on Finance today held a hearing to consider the nominations of five individuals to be Commissioners of the International Trade Commission (ITC). Two of the nominees—Peter-Anthony Pappas (R) and David Foley (R)—have played key roles in IP policy on the Hill over the last several years. Introducing Pappas was Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC), under whom Pappas presently serves as   Director of Intellectual Property Policy for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where Tillis Chairs the Subcommittee on Intellectual Property (IP).

In an order issued earlier this week, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires granted Director Review and partially vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Final Written Decision that found several claims of U.S. Patent No. 11,828,425 unpatentable as obvious. Squires remanded the case after finding that the Board did not explain why its conclusion as to claim 2 differed from the outcome of a parallel district court proceeding on the same claim.