The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s rejection on inter partes review of 16 claims of a patent for a handheld universal tool for use with various remote tire pressure monitoring systems. The Board erred, however, in denying the patent owner’s request to substitute 16…

Patent-owner Inventor Holdings, LLC, was properly ordered by the federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware, to pay attorney fees and costs incurred by retailer Bed Bath & Beyond in successfully defending against infringement claims, after the asserted patent was found to be ineligible under Section 101 of the Patent Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals…

Substantial evidence supported a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision finding a patent for an eyewear retention device unpatentable as obvious, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. A prior art device created by a fisherman and described in a newspaper article made use of a “resilient” retainer—as claimed by the…

Decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in three interference proceedings between Stanford University and the Chinese University of Hong Kong (“CUHK”)—in which the Board found that methods of testing for fetal aneuploidies in DNA samples drawn from maternal blood were unpatentable for lack of written description—have been vacated by the U.S. Court of…

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erroneously construed the term “aseptic” in an inter partes review (IPR) of a patent for a method of aseptically bottling sterilized food, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. The Board erred in construing the term as incorporating “any applicable United States FDA standard” rather…

In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding challenging a SimpleAir patent that described a method of transmitting data to remote computing devices, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in concluding that IPR petitioner Google failed to establish that a combination of prior art references rendered the challenged claims unpatentably obvious, the U.S….

Pharmaceuticals company Watson’s proposed generic version of competitor Shire’s brand-name mesalamine LIALDA® did not satisfy the requirements for a Markush group claimed by a Shire patent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. A compound contained in the ANDA product—which was not present in the patent claim’s Markush group—structurally and functionally…

The asserted claims of a DuPont patent disclosing a process for preparing flexographic printing plates were invalid as obvious over prior art and therefore could not support infringement contentions against DuPont’s competitor, MacDermid Printing Solutions, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. In addition, MacDermid’s Digital CST printing plates did not…

Factual findings did not support a district court’s conclusion that a former analyst for two financial services companies intended to cause a loss of $12 million when he unlawfully copied proprietary computer files and used the data to conduct computerized stock market trades for himself. A 36-month prison sentence based on the erroneous intended loss…

For bringing a “frivolous” appeal of a district court’s claim construction order in a patent dispute over a portable camera convertible support device, AdjustaCam, LLC, has been ordered by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit to pay Newegg, Inc., Newegg.com, Inc., and Rosewill, Inc. (collectively, “Newegg”) their attorney fees, expenses, and costs…