#patent-law

#patent-law

"The court's interpretation of Rule 3.1(c) as including an unwritten 'how' requirement was arbitrary and improperly reads in a requirement that has no support in the plain language of the rule."

"If Xerox wanted its more limited construction, it should have written the claims as it did in the substitute claim," said the CAFC.

Cancellation bears on what can be covered under the doctrine of equivalents... because a relevant artisan would understand the close basic-physics relationship of the cancelled and retained claims.

The Plant Patent Act of 1930 allows for the patenting of newly discovered and asexually reproduced plants, including cultivated sports, mutants, hybrids, and seedlings. It, however, excludes tuber propagated plants and those found in their natural state.

Wen Xie emphasizes the inevitability of AI's presence in every profession and technology, asserting that resistance is futile in patent drafting and prosecution.

The upcoming Supreme Court petition in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. presents a critical examination of the meaning of "prior art" in patent law.

"If it is repugnant for legislation to apply retroactively to destroy settled expectations, it must similarly be repugnant for a concocted common law doctrine to be applied retroactively to destroy settled expectations."

Driscoll's holds significant power in the berry market, not by growing berries directly but through licensing new varieties and enforcing strict patent rights.

In Contour IP Holding, a patented video streaming technology was initially struck down in the district courts as ineligible, only to be revived by the Federal Circuit in a rare 101 reversal.

PERA 2025 maintains that unmodified human genes in the human body are not patent eligible, but changes the previous definition of gene modification.

According to the appeals judges, the court's choice to combine all five infringement claims into a single question meant that the verdict form violated Apple's right to a jury unanimity for each claim.

"What has always drawn my attention to the ITC is that it is a fairly collaborative and yet aggressive forum for building a detailed factual record around which you can gather a host of opinions."

The large number and vast scope of the patents asserted in the district court litigation... weighs against discretionary denial, as the Board is better suited to review a large number of patents involving diverse subject matter.

In the recent iRhythm Technologies v. Welch Allyn decision, a new basis for discretionary denial emphasizes a petitioner's prior knowledge of a patent and inaction.