Last Week In The Federal Circuit (March 13 – March 17): A reminder that motivation doesn’t need to be found in the prior art references themselves
- The Court had a busy week as the weather begins to turn, and those with school-aged kids begin to plan for spring break. This week we look at the Court’s latest reminder that obviousness is a flexible analysis, so below we provide our usual weekly... ›
Last Week In The Federal Circuit (February 13 – 17): Shining Light On Competing Patent And State Law Claims
By: Seth W. Lloyd
If you’re like me, hanging holiday lights generally sucks any kind of holiday spirit right out of you. This week’s case of the week involves technology that might help. And it resolves (at least at the preliminary injunction stage) competing state tort and federal patent law... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (January 23 – January 27): Furnishing Statutory Meaning
The Supreme Court recently issued its first decision of the Term in Arellano v. McDonough , affirming the Federal Circuit and holding that a statutory provision governing the effective date of a veterans’ benefits application is not subject to equitable tolling. (We wrote about the... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (January 17 – January 20): “Larger Than” Or “Large Enough”?
By: Seth W. Lloyd
If you think claim construction is more fun than watching paint peel, then you’re probably a patent lawyer. And what’s more fun than claim construction? Claim construction with an indefiniteness challenge, as happened in this week’s case of the week. Case of the (recent) week: Grace... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (January 3 – January 6): Corroboration Station
A new year means new Federal Circuit decisions to analyze. Our case of the week recounts an interesting saga of companies copying each other’s patent applications to provoke an interference. And if that’s not enough to grab your attention, the case provides some insight into the... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (November 14-18): No Disclaimer For You!
By: Seth W. Lloyd
Some of you may remember the Federal Circuit’s decision from a few (actually 5!) years ago holding that patent owner statements made in an IPR proceeding may “support a finding of prosecution disclaimer during claim construction.” That decision left unresolved an important question—whether disclaimer statements... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (October 31 – November 4): Keeping It In The (Patent) Family
Claim construction disputes often include arguments based on patents in the same family or materials incorporated by reference. Our case of the week discusses both categories of sources—and illustrates some limits on their use in claim construction. Case of the (recent) week: Finjan LLC v.... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (October 17 – October 21): Mapping The Section 101 Landscape
As we’ve noted , the Supreme Court is once again considering whether to take up patent eligibility: it recently CVSGed two more Section 101 cases. While we wait for the government’s views, the Federal Circuit will continue resolving Section 101 disputes, likely including some close cases resulting in... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (October 10 – October 14): Intrigue, Espionage, Judicial Review, and Administrative Law
By: Brian R. Matsui
The Supreme Court term has started, and the Court once again seems to be dipping its toes in the water with more CVSGs in 101 cases. Maybe this time the Court will take the plunge. For our case of the week—our highly subjective selection based on... ›Last Week In The Federal Circuit (October 3 – October 7): Genus/Species Meets Inherent Anticipation
By: Seth W. Lloyd
Unlike obviousness, the test for anticipation in patent law is generally pretty simple—does the prior art disclose the same thing as the challenged patent claims. But as our latest case of the week shows, that simple test can sometimes involve subtle, and more complicated, issues.... ›