Categories
Archives
Receive Email Updates
-
-
-
Certified Licensing Professionals, Inc., 2021 
Disclaimer
This blog, Patents4Life, does not contain legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it a solicitation for business. This is the personal blog of Warren Woessner and does not reflect the views of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, or any of its attorneys or staff. To the best of his ability, the Author provides current and accurate information at the time of each post, however, readers should check for current information and accuracy.
-
- About Me
Warren D. Woessner
Pages
Archives
Tag Archives: Federal Circuit
In re Cuozzo – Still no changes for the claim interpretation standard during inter partes review proceedings
A guest post from Theresa Stadheim, attorney at Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner. In In re: Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC, Appeal No. 2014-1301 (Fed. Cir. July 8, 2015, decision by Dyk), the Federal Circuit decided not to review the Patent Trial … Continue reading
Senate Confirms Finnegan Partner Kara Stoll to Federal Circuit
Without a single “nay” vote, and with at least some noting that she will be the first woman of color to join the Fed. Cir., the Senate has confirmed Kara Fernandez Stoll, a litigation partner at Finnegan, to fill the seat vacated … Continue reading
Posted in People
Tagged Federal Circuit, intellectual property, Kara Fernandez Stoll, Patent Law, President Obama
Leave a comment
Kimble v. Marvel – Supreme Court Sticks With Brulotte Rule
In a rather breezy opinion filled with Spiderman puns and references, Justice Kagan, writing for a 6/3 Court, affirmed that Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U.S. 29 (1964) controlled the outcome of this dispute over Marvel’s decision to halt royalty … Continue reading
Posted in Licensing
Tagged Brulotte Rule, Federal Circuit, intellectual property, ip, Kimble v Marvel, Spiderman, Supreme Court, Warren Woessner
Leave a comment
Teva v. Sandoz – “Strange Brew” Boils Over
On June 18, 2015, a divided Fed. Cir. panel reaffirmed that the key claim of a Teva patent, U.S. Pat. No. 5,800,808, was invalid as indefinite, although the Fed. Cir. had previously been reversed twice by the Supreme Court – … Continue reading