Posts Tagged: "patents"

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Tuesday, January 14, issued a split decision reversing a district court’s grant of summary judgement of non-infringement in a case involving a patent for a multi-stage tub meant for bathing infants and toddlers. Judge Stark authored the majority opinion and Judge Chen dissented-in-part.

My conversation this week with John White was much like any number of conversations we have had over the years over dinner or drinks. What prompted me to ask John to speak with us this week was an article he recently wrote, which we published on IPWatchdog. It was styled as an open letter to Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, the incoming co-leaders of the soon-to-be Department of Government Efficiency. In that article John explains that “the patent system is currently foundered”, but that it can be fixed with “focus and ongoing commitment to see the fixes through to results.” So, that is where we start our conversation, like so many we have had over the last 26 years—what is wrong with the patent system and how should it be fixed.

In June 2023, as is widely known, more than 50 years of efforts to create a pan-European patent jurisdiction were finally successful and the Unified Patent Court opened its doors. Historically, there were two traditions within Europe, namely, the German principle of separation (often wrongly called also “bifurcation”), according to which infringement actions and nullity actions were separate and handled at different courts, and the otherwise prevailing principle of unity, according to which infringement and validity are examined in the same proceedings. With the creation of the Unified Patent Court, it was believed that a middle ground had been achieved between the two concepts, but the data shows that a “counterclaim gap” may be emerging.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today issued a precedential decision reversing a district court’s determination that certain claims of a patent for Novartis’ heart failure drug Entresto were invalid for lack of written description, and affirming a finding that the claims were not shown to be invalid for obviousness, lack of enablement, or indefiniteness. Judge Lourie authored the opinion.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we speak with Heath Hoglund, President of Via Licensing Alliance. The conversation takes us deep into the world of audio, video, standard essential patents, patent pools, patent licensing, patent dealmaking, inevitable patent litigation that is often necessary when so much money is at stake, and much more.

Three significant bills that would alter patent law were considered by U.S. legislators in 2024: the “Promoting and Respecting Economically Vital American Innovation Leadership Act” (PREVAIL Act); the Realizing Engineering, Science, and Technology Opportunities by Restoring Exclusive Patent Rights Act (RESTORE Act);  and the “Patent Eligibility Restoration Act” (PERA). Each bill had bipartisan sponsors and was intended to benefit patent owners.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Monday, December 9, in a precedential decision affirmed a district court determination that Priceline.com and Booking.com did not infringe DDR Holdings’ U.S. Patent No. 7,818,399. The opinion was authored by Judge Chen. The ‘399 patent relates to “generating a composite web page that combines certain visual elements of a ‘host’ website with content from a third-party ‘merchant,’” according to the CAFC opinion. The patent was also at issue in the CAFC’s 2014 decision between DDR and Hotels.com, with the court ultimately upholding the ‘399 patent as eligible under Section 101.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit on Monday, December 2, issued a ruling in Koninklijke KPN N.V. v. Vidal affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) invalidation of several patent claims to technologies for managing access to telecommunications networks. In so ruling, the Federal Circuit held that KPN’s plausible alternative understanding of a prior art reference did not require a finding that the PTAB’s obviousness ruling was unsupported by substantial evidence.

On the heels of this win in the Senate for those in favor of PTAB reform, the very next day USPTO Director Kathi Vidal wrote on the Director’s Blog about how wonderful the PTAB has been, saying in part: “Since AIA proceedings began over a decade ago, almost 70% of challenged patents have been upheld at the PTAB.” Simply stated, she is wrong. If you actually look past the extraordinarily misleading PTO narrative you see a very different reality. The incontrovertible facts presented by the PTAB itself demonstrate that of those patents that reach a final written decision at the PTAB 85% lose at least one claim and 70% lost all claims. This factual reality is exactly opposite of what Director Vidal claimed. The PTAB is not a friendly forum for patent owners—it has always been and continues to be an extraordinarily favorable forum for challengers. The PTAB is harming innovation in America because it is making it untenable for individuals and small entities to even get started.

Today, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in DoggyPhone LLC v. Tomofun LLC affirming the Western District of Washington’s entry of summary judgment of noninfringement on DoggyPhone’s patent claims to a system for remote human-pet interaction. The Federal Circuit found that Tomofun’s accused system did not begin transmission of live video or audio responsive to pet input, concluding that there was no genuine dispute of material fact on one of three independent bases for the district court’s noninfringement ruling.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a short precedential order yesterday denying a request by Cisco Systems, Inc. and Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co. to voluntarily dismiss their appeal of a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) ruling for K. Mizra LLC.

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court published an order list indicating it had denied a petition for writ of certiorari in Return Mail, Inc. v. United States, leaving in place lower court rulings invalidating Return Mail’s patent claims covering methods for processing undeliverable mail. While Return Mail saw a successful outcome from its first trip to the Supreme Court in 2019, this cert denial represents yet another missed opportunity to answer calls from all three branches of the U.S. federal government to clarify the abstract idea exception to patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

China is more relevant than ever before and should drive much of what Trump 2.0 does on patents and critical technologies such as EVs, batteries and communications, all crucial to America’s economic and national security. This op-ed follows up on my coverage of then candidate Trump in 2016, which focused on his intersection of China and patents.

I invited Walt to join us for our annual life sciences program this year. My pitch was that we would have a one-on-one conversation that would not only make up the final segment of the program, but which would also be used for our IPWatchdog Unleashed podcast. He graciously accepted my invitation, and we sat down for this conversation on Wednesday, October 30. Our conversation focused on the role of science, technology and innovation in U.S. competitiveness and for U.S. national security. We discuss the ongoing Bayh-Dole march-in rights drama being caused by his old agency—NIST, the diverging approach to commercialization between universities who can own and license patent rights and federal agencies, the upward trajectory of China vis-à-vis innovation and intellectual property, and the stagnation within the U.S. innovation ecosystem.

Today, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) published its annual World Intellectual Property Indicators Report, providing a snapshot of IP filing activities across the globe during 2023. Among the report’s key findings is that global patent filing activity increased for the fourth straight year, thanks in large part to continued growth in China and a strong showing from India, which placed among the top ten nations for patents, trademarks and industrial designs. This year’s report also underscored the importance of Asian IP filing offices, which received two-thirds of all patent applications filed in 2023.