Category Archives: Federal Court

In re Smith, International, Inc. – What’s a “Body” to Do?

In re Smith, International, Inc., Appeal no. 2016-2303 (Fed. Cir., Sept. 16, 2017)(”Smith”), the Fed. Cir. reversed the PTAB (that had affirmed the Examiner’s rejection of the claims) on the basis that the Board had subjected an element in Smith’s … Continue reading

Posted in Federal Court, Post-Grant Issues, Prior Art | Leave a comment

Sea Change in IPR or Just an SOS? – Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal

Sitting en banc, a fractured Federal Circuit (Appeal no. 2015-1177 (Fed. Cir., Oct. 4, 2017)) released 140+ pages comprising five separate opinions (7 Judges “concur in result”). The majority held that, at least under the current PTO regulations: “The only … Continue reading

Posted in Federal Court, Patent Reform Legislation, Post-Grant Issues, USPTO Practice and Policy | Leave a comment

Sixteen Critical 2016-2017 Patentability & Validity Developments

This is a guest post from Donald Chisum and Janice Mueller of the Chisum Patent Academy. Below are highlights of the Critical  Patentability & Validity Developments of 2016-2017.   The Federal Circuit’s January 2017 decision in Sonix Tech. Co. v. Publications Int’l, … Continue reading

Posted in 102 Patentability, Alice, Appeals, Assignment/Ownership, Claim Interpretation, Federal Court, Infringement, Post-Grant Issues, USPTO Practice and Policy | Leave a comment

Mallinckrodt v. Praxair – Innomax Method Patent Fails Alice/Mayo Test

On Tuesday, a Delaware district court judge ruled that a group of Mallinckrodt patents failed the Alice/(mostly)Mayo test as claiming a natural phenomenon. The patents are directed to a method of safely using the Innomax system, which administers nitric oxide to infants … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Federal Court, Uncategorized | 1 Comment