-
Federal Circuit Finds Disclosure Of Devices At Major Industry Event Constituted “Public Use” That Barred Patenting
02/28/2023
On February 15, 2023, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment of invalidity under the public use bar of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), based on the patentee’s disclosure of devices having the patented technology at an industry event. Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., No. 2021-2246 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 15, 2023). The Court found that the patentee had allowed sophisticated industry members to scrutinize the devices closely, such that they would have understood the invention, without any obligations of confidentiality.
-
Federal Circuit Asks Whether Prior Art Reference Is “By Another”
05/24/2022
On May 20, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) vacated a final written decision from the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”), remanding for the PTAB to resolve a factual dispute over inventorship that it had left unaddressed. Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., No. 2021-1179 (Fed. Cir. May 19, 2022).
-
Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Finding That Claims Are Not Unpatentable As Anticipated Or Obvious
10/29/2019
On October 23, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued an opinion affirming the finding of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that Koninklijke Philips N.V.’s patent claims are not unpatentable. Google LLC v. Koninklijke Philips N.V., __ Fed. Appx. __ (Fed. Cir. Oct. 23, 2019). The CAFC ruled that the PTAB correctly found that Google failed to meet its burden of establishing that the claims were unpatentable as anticipated and that it was not an abuse of discretion for the PTAB to decline to consider Google’s untimely, backup obviousness argument.