The Federal Circuit recently reaffirmed the requirement that, where multiple patents are asserted, the jury must be asked to answer the infringement question on a patent-by-patent basis. In Ollnova Techs. Ltd. v. ecobee Techs. ULC, Appeal Nos. 2025-1045, -1046 (Fed....
Introduction In Constellation Designs, LLC v. LG Electronics Inc., Case No. 2024-1822, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Eastern District of Texas’s denial of LG’s motion for judgment as a matter of law on non-infringement, holding that Constellation could prove...
Introduction In ironSource Ltd. v. Digital Turbine, Inc., the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision on the ground that the petitioner lacked Article III standing. The court held that ironSource failed to demonstrate...
The Federal Circuit continues to provide guidance on the scope of Rule 702 and the district court’s gatekeeping role in assessing the admissibility of expert testimony. In a recent precedential decision, the Federal Circuit emphasized the distinction between issues...
A PTAB panel acting on a Request for Director Review found that an earlier PTAB panel’s decision that claims 13 and 15 of U.S. Patent No. 10,299,336 were unpatentable was erroneous. The review panel reached that conclusion because the initial panel relied upon...
A divided Federal Circuit panel held that a district court abused its discretion when it excluded an expert’s opinions as being contradictory to the district court’s claim construction order. In Barry v. DePuy Synthes Cos., Appeal Nos. 2023-2226, -2234 (Fed. Cir....
Introduction The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may no longer be accepting inter partes review (IPR) petitions for patents that have been in force for more than six years, and there may be nothing you can do about it. In In re Cambridge Industries USA Inc., the...
We previously reported on the risks that an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner undertakes when advancing a broad claim construction, e.g., one that the patent owner is advancing but that the petitioner is resisting in a parallel district court case. See PTAB Panels...
The Federal Circuit recently clarified language in pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) and (e) such that prior work by a subset of inventors of a later application may be available as prior art to that later application. Those provisions establish as prior art matter that was...
In Rex Medical, L.P. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc., Intuitive Surgical Operations, Inc., Intuitive Surgical Holdings, LLC, Nos. 2024-1072, 2024-1125 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 2, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of...