All Posts

CAFC Denies Apple Transfer Out of Albright’s Court

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.

Becoming a Rainmaker: Familiarity and Trust Sell, Not Cold Contacts

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?

SCOTUS Denies Petition to Review CAFC Precedent on Justification for Primary Reference Selection

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.

Amid Approval of EU AI Act, Creators Demand Stronger Protections for Rightsholders

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.

Arnold & Porter is Seeking an Engineering Patent Agent

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.

CAFC Affirms District Court’s Inventorship Analysis

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. is Seeking a Patent / Intellectual Property Attorney

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. 

Responding to Obviousness Rejections in Light of the USPTO’s New Guidance

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently released new guidance to patent examiners on making obviousness rejections. The guidance focuses on post-KSR precedential jurisprudence from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Some of the guidance is fairly mundane, some of it is not. The purpose of this article is to propose a few responses one might use to counter rejections that apply certain problematic aspects of the new guidance.

Becoming a Rainmaker: The Importance of Expertise, Reputation and Personality

The key to rainmaking for lawyers is understanding that those who have decisional authority to hire an attorney are hiring you. Perhaps, once upon a time, those who hired lawyers were more interested in the name of the firm, but the days of an attorney staying with a firm long term are over. Attorneys move, firms merge or sometimes collapse. What this means is that, as long as the firm you are with is large enough to do the work you seek, your name and reputation far and away supersede the name on the letterhead.

USPTO Wants Input on How to Better Commercialize Innovation

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) today issued a Request for Comments (RFC) that will be published in the Federal Register tomorrow seeking input from the public on how to better incentivize commercialization of innovation, particularly in green and critical or emerging technologies. According to the RFC, the comments received “will be used to evaluate possibilities for amplifying the impact of our current work, and to explore new ways to support the transfer of innovation to the marketplace.”

High-Tech Groups and EFF Revive Patent Troll Narrative and Other Lies

Efforts by high-tech companies to undermine both the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2023 and the Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership (PREVAIL) Act ramped up this week, with a joint letter sent to the Senate Judiciary Committee by a number of tech industry organizations on Monday and a campaign launched by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) yesterday.

CAFC Affirms PTAB Finding that Reasonable Pertinence Proves Analogous Art

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a brief opinion authored by Judge Chen today that rejected Daedalus Blue LLC’s appeal of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision finding certain claims of its patent on a data management system unpatentable. The PTAB held that U.S. Patent No. 8,671,132 was unpatentable as obvious over combinations of three prior art references: “Gelb”, “Tivoli”, and “Callaghan.” Daedalus in part argued on appeal that the Board incorrectly found that Gelb is analogous art because Gelb “is not reasonably pertinent to the problems identified in the ’132 patent.”

Uncovering Valuable AI Assets: A Strategic Guide for AI Companies and Patent Attorneys

Artificial Intelligence (AI) stands at the forefront of innovation, transforming industries and shaping the future of global economies. Although AI innovators understand the value of intellectual property (IP) protection for their innovations, they often don’t know how to secure the right kind of IP protection for their innovations. Employing a process for systematically mining AI innovations to create a map of those innovations is one option for identifying the most suitable form(s) of IP protection to obtain, based on the innovation and the business model within which that innovation will be commercially deployed.

Judicial Conference Policy on Random Case Assignments Prompted by Tillis/Roberts Complaints About Waco

The Judicial Conference of the United States announced yesterday that it is strengthening its policy on random case assignments in order to limit the practice of judge shopping in U.S. district courts. According to the press release, the policy would assign judges via a district-wide random selection process in “all civil actions that seek to bar or mandate state or federal actions, ‘whether by declaratory judgment and/or any form of injunctive relief.’”

Vidal Delays OpenSky Payment But Upholds Attorney’s Fees Award for VLSI

On March 11, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Kathi Vidal issued an order on rehearing that upheld the attorney’s fee award levied against petitioner OpenSky Industries over its abuse of process during inter partes review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Although Director Vidal’s order delayed the date by which OpenSky must pay, the ruling nixed OpenSky’s challenges to the more than $400,000 attorney’s fee award in favor of patent owner VLSI.