Federal Circuit patent decisions
The Federal Circuit affirmed the rejection of a mobile-messaging patent application because the applicant failed to preserve substantive challenges to the examiner’s and PTAB’s indefiniteness rulings.
The Federal Circuit broadened the ordinary meaning of “joined,” ordered partial summary judgment of infringement on three powered cover-plate patent claims, and affirmed noninfringement on others.
The Federal Circuit held that a live patent-case indemnification dispute was not moot and qualified for Rule 60(b)(1) relief, while directing dismissal without prejudice after the parties agreed federal supplemental jurisdiction should end.
The Federal Circuit held that later experimental data may show whether a patent enabled its full scope and affirmed the invalidation of an enormous enzyme genus.
The Federal Circuit affirmed judgment against Truinject because its lost-deal damages theory lacked causation and its new appellate theories were forfeited.
The Federal Circuit held that a scientifically impossible claim can be definite yet invalid because the patent cannot enable its full scope.
The Federal Circuit dismissed ParkerVision’s appeal because unresolved claims from the same patent prevented a final, appealable judgment.
The Federal Circuit required a fuller sanctions analysis where multiple pre-suit signals raised serious questions about software-patent eligibility.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that inadequate written-description support broke priority and made the inventor’s earlier publication invalidating prior art.
The Federal Circuit held that new claims and repackaged arguments did not satisfy the rule for reopening prosecution after a new Board rejection.
The Federal Circuit held that patents combining user history, page context, and ad-performance data claimed an abstract targeted-advertising idea without an inventive concept.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that prior-art codewords qualified as claimed feature vectors, leaving all challenged speech-recognition patent claims unpatentable for obviousness.
The Federal Circuit held object-level profitability claims ineligible because their asserted parallel-processing improvement was not required by the claims.
The Federal Circuit vacated a catheter-patent obviousness rejection because the PTAB construed “flow barrier” more broadly than the specification allowed.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a $3.24 million patent-case fee and expense award based on objectively baseless and bad-faith litigation conduct.
The Federal Circuit held that TexasLDPC received all substantial patent rights, its enforcement-only business model did not terminate the license, and Texas A&M was not a required party.
The Federal Circuit vacated NCS Multistage’s infringement, validity, and damages judgments after correcting the construction of “casing string” and holding an earlier commercial tool was prior art.
The Federal Circuit preserved NCS Multistage’s contributory-infringement win against TCO but vacated the no-invalidity judgment under the corrected construction of “casing string.”
The Federal Circuit affirmed noninfringement, holding that “universal” spinal-implant preambles limit two patent claims and that substantial evidence supported the jury on a third.
A divided Federal Circuit affirmed noninfringement after construing a “cooperating service provider” as one that agrees to supply non-blocking bandwidth.
The Federal Circuit held that an unauthorized email did not timely commence a patent-term-adjustment challenge and that last-day filing problems did not warrant equitable tolling.
The Federal Circuit upheld a Section 285 fee award because Viavi inadequately investigated its infringement theory and continued pursuing it after contrary evidence emerged.
The Federal Circuit affirmed noninfringement because Biofer’s patent requires maintaining a pH between 7.0 and 9.0 throughout the claimed sugar-oxidation step.
The Federal Circuit affirmed three groups of PTAB decisions invalidating Netlist computer-memory patent claims as obvious.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that patent claims covering one-drop vitamin D delivery to infants were obvious over prior methods.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB ruling that preserved claims 1–13 but invalidated claims 14–18 of SpaceTime3D’s 3D webpage-interface patent.
The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB decisions invalidating all challenged claims of two SpaceTime3D graphical-interface patents as obvious.
The Federal Circuit upheld written-description support for three Cabometyx patents while dismissing as moot and vacating a ruling on a fourth patent claim.
The Federal Circuit affirmed Samsung’s complete defense win, including a no-infringement verdict and a ruling that Qualcomm-chip devices remained licensed.
The Federal Circuit transferred a patent-settlement contract appeal to the Fifth Circuit because the claim did not necessarily raise a substantial patent-law issue.
The Federal Circuit held that a district court may decide patent eligibility after finding venue improper when both dismissal grounds were fully presented.
The Federal Circuit upheld key Smart Mobile wireless-patent claims and sent other claims back because the PTAB did not address evidence that Apple’s proposed prior-art combination would create a data bottleneck.
The Federal Circuit vacated part of a PTAB obviousness ruling because the patent’s provisioning and activation terms require adding a new service, not managing an existing one.
The Federal Circuit held that inventor-advocacy groups lacked organizational and associational standing to challenge the USPTO’s description of a patent’s right to exclude.
The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB decisions invalidating claims from three single-cell nucleic-acid analysis patents as obvious over combined prior art.
The Federal Circuit held that a non-practicing patent owner must plausibly allege its licensees complied with patent-marking rules to seek pre-suit damages, and upheld an exceptional-case fee award.
The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB decisions preserving Westport’s fuel-injector patent claims because substantial evidence showed the prior art’s flexible membrane did not disclose the claimed solid-like hydraulic link.
The Federal Circuit upheld a PTAB obviousness ruling, finding facial-analysis research reasonably pertinent to Nielsen’s audience-measurement image claims.
The Federal Circuit upheld denial of a design-patent preliminary injunction because the accused handbag hook was plainly dissimilar and irreparable harm was unsupported.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that all 24 claims of a multimedia content-flow patent were unpatentable as obvious over prior art.
The Federal Circuit held that patents for generating and sharing interactive charts claimed an abstract idea without an inventive concept.
The Federal Circuit vacated a PTAB obviousness ruling because an AIA reference needs written-description support for at least one published claim to claim its provisional filing date.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that an earlier streaming-media patent anticipated WAG Acquisition’s buffering claims.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that a crossbow patent claim was anticipated after construing “mounted to” to include direct and indirect connections bounded by the claim’s other limitations.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB decision finding Nike fitness-watch patent claims anticipated or obvious because the prior art supported the Board’s broad reading of fitness level and its combinations.
The Federal Circuit vacated a patent preliminary injunction because the district court misconstrued “backplate” and “pin” and could not presume irreparable harm.
The Federal Circuit affirmed noninfringement because the claimed dissolving agent had to dissolve lidocaine as well as keep it from crystallizing.
The Federal Circuit revived MPH Technologies’ mobile-security patent case, holding that the asserted claims were not limited to IPSec and that a challenged secure-connection limitation was not indefinite.
The Federal Circuit affirmed noninfringement because Leica’s microscopes use selected wavelengths rather than the claimed entire spectrum of white light.
The Federal Circuit held that substantial evidence supported the PTAB’s finding that Pfizer’s proposed vaccine claims would have been obvious.