Federal Circuit patent decisions
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s decision not to consider a new prior art reference raised for the first time in the petitioner’s reply brief, leaving one claim of a networked-gaming patent standing.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that a patent infringement case was ‘exceptional’ under 35 U.S.C. § 285, upholding an attorney fee award where the plaintiff never pursued discovery or demonstrated any evidence of infringement.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that a patent for automatically silencing a mobile phone when it pairs with a vehicle is directed to the abstract idea of screening notifications and lacks an inventive concept under Alice.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that Enviro Tech’s poultry-processing patent was invalid because the term “about” in its pH range limitations failed to inform skilled artisans of the claim scope with reasonable certainty.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s finding that Wildseed Mobile’s targeted mobile advertising patent claims are unpatentable as obvious, rejecting the patent owner’s narrow construction of ‘information taken from a message.’
The Federal Circuit affirmed that Cisco’s products do not infringe three Centripetal network security patents, reaching the opposite result from the original bench trial that was vacated due to the judge’s failure to disclose his wife’s Cisco stock ownership.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that a patent for monitoring vehicles using RFID detection and operator identification is directed to the abstract idea of detecting, transmitting, and processing data, and lacks any inventive concept to survive Alice scrutiny.
The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB’s construction of ‘short range’ as a relative term and upheld the invalidation of one claim, but vacated and remanded on four other claims where the Board failed to address FedEx’s argument about power management instructions.
In a precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit drew a sharp § 101 line between functional ‘optimization’ claims that recite a result without specifying a concrete configuration and ‘constellation’ claims that recite specific non-uniform point arrangements. It vacated summary judgment of eligibility for the former and affirmed eligibility for the latter, while affirming the underlying jury verdict, willful-infringement finding, and damages award against LG.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the jury’s $11.125 million verdict in a DSL standard-essential patent dispute, rejecting TQ Delta’s challenges to noninfringement and invalidity findings on two of its patents while upholding the damages award on four others.
The Federal Circuit reversed summary judgment of noninfringement as to one version of Google’s Content ID system, finding genuine disputes of material fact remain over whether the system performs a ‘sublinear’ search as required by Network-1’s video fingerprinting patent.
Federal Circuit affirms PTAB ruling that claims of Slingshot Printing’s inkjet printer semiconductor substrate patent are obvious over prior-art printhead designs.
Federal Circuit affirms PTAB unpatentability of most claims of Centripetal Networks’ cybersecurity patent, then reverses PTAB on cross-appeal to find all 20 claims obvious — wiping out the patent entirely.
Federal Circuit affirms ITC finding of no Section 337 violation in Centripetal Networks’ cybersecurity patent dispute against Keysight Technologies, citing failure to satisfy the domestic industry technical prong.
Federal Circuit affirms that two augmented-reality patents asserted against Pokémon Go and Harry Potter: Wizards Unite are invalid as abstract ideas under § 101.
Federal Circuit revives one patent claim against YouTube’s Siberia Content ID system while affirming two others invalid for indefiniteness.
The Federal Circuit dismissed a §101 patent eligibility appeal as moot after discovering the parties’ settlement agreement gave the defendant a $100 option to license the challenged patent — an amount so untethered from the patent’s value that it created no real case or controversy.
The Federal Circuit affirmed PTAB decisions invalidating Katana Silicon’s semiconductor stacking patents after holding that “adhesion layer” means any layer that adheres, not only a pre-formed solid sheet, bringing the claims within the scope of prior art.
The Federal Circuit reversed a $17 million trade secret verdict, holding that design concepts disclosed in prior patents are generally known and unprotectable as trade secrets even if never commercialized, while affirming a $1 million Lanham Act counterfeiting judgment.
The Federal Circuit denied FullView’s § 1292(b) petition to take an immediate appeal from district court rulings that invalidated some patent claims under § 101 and excluded FullView’s damages expert, leaving both rulings in place until final judgment.
The Federal Circuit reversed a judgment invalidating Teva’s method-of-treatment patents covering anti-CGRP antibodies for migraines, distinguishing Amgen v. Sanofi and reinstating a jury verdict against Eli Lilly.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s cancellation of MRI’s outdoor display cooling patent claims via Rule 36, completing Samsung’s successful IPR challenge to the patent family.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s cancellation of AG 18’s networked gaming patent claims asserted against DraftKings (now DK Crown Holdings) via Rule 36 summary affirmance.
The Federal Circuit reversed summary judgment of noninfringement of a multi-core processor patent, holding that a pretrial stipulation establishing a 70% U.S. nexus applied to infringement — not just damages — and that prosecution history did not clearly disclaim the broader scope of apparatus claims.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that U.S. Patent No. 8,458,689 — covering methods and apparatus for reprogramming automotive engine controllers — was invalid under the pre-AIA on-sale bar, holding that source code commands are not hearsay and that selling a device embodying a patented method triggers the bar even if the device’s inner workings were not publicly disclosed.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s finding that Universal Electronics’ voice-input remote control patent claims were unpatentable as obvious, in the latest chapter of the long-running patent battle between the two consumer electronics companies.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB dismissal of cigar maker Fuente Marketing Ltd.s opposition to a vape-pen design mark, holding that despite overlapping goods and channels, the distinct commercial impression of Vaporous Technologies stick-figure design mark defeated likelihood of confusion with Fuentes standard-character X marks.
The Federal Circuit dismissed ironSource’s appeal of a PTAB post-grant review decision, holding that ironSource failed to demonstrate Article III standing because its evidence did not address the substitute claims actually at issue.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s finding that patent claims directed to operating an information exchange are ineligible abstract ideas under Section 101, holding that generic computing instructions lack an inventive concept.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s finding that imported marine air conditioning systems did not violate Section 337, holding that the asserted patent claims were anticipated by prior art and the accused products did not infringe remaining claims.
The Federal Circuit held that patents omitting a true co-inventor are invalid when the error cannot be corrected under 35 U.S.C. § 256, because § 256(b) requires actual notice and opportunity to be heard — and a co-inventor who cannot be located cannot receive that notice.
In a case of first impression, the Federal Circuit held that patents listing incorrect inventors are invalid when the omitted coinventor cannot be found to receive the notice and hearing required by 35 U.S.C. Section 256(b).
The Federal Circuit vacated a $600 million patent infringement judgment against Norton (Gen Digital), holding that Columbia University’s computer virus-detection patent claims are directed to abstract ideas under Alice Step 1, and denied en banc rehearing.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that patents for sharing content using unique identifiers and location data are directed to an abstract idea and lack an inventive concept under Section 101.
The Federal Circuit held that inter partes review (IPR) estoppel bars only invalidity grounds based on patents or printed publications — not grounds based on physical prior-art products or systems. The ruling resolves a decade-long split among district courts and significantly limits how much challengers are foreclosed from arguing after an IPR.
The Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s obviousness finding against Virtek’s laser-alignment patent, holding that showing a skilled artisan had the knowledge to make a combination is insufficient for motivation to combine — there must also be a reason why they would have done so.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that importing patented medical devices for a U.S. conference fell within the 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) safe harbor because the importation bore a reasonable relationship to obtaining FDA approval, even if the conference also served commercial purposes.
The Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s indefiniteness ruling on a lithium-ion battery patent, holding that two claim limitations are not contradictory—and therefore not indefinite—if they can both be satisfied simultaneously, even if one limitation makes an element optional while a narrowing limitation in the same claim makes that element mandatory.
The Federal Circuit affirmed obviousness of Pfizer’s pneumococcal vaccine patent, clarifying that the result-effective variable doctrine applies to optimize claim ranges even when the prior art does not disclose an overlapping range — expanding the scope of when routine optimization can render a claim obvious.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that IBM’s patent claims directed to identifying advertisements based on search queries are abstract ideas ineligible under § 101—using a conventional database to match ads with search results adds no inventive concept—while partially reversing on noninfringement, remanding one claim for further proceedings.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that Amazon failed to prove inequitable conduct against Freshub’s voice-processing patents, reiterating that the clear-and-convincing evidence standard requires proving both the materiality of a misrepresentation and specific intent to deceive the USPTO.
The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a district court judgment in a voice-recognition/cable-TV patent dispute, holding that the district court improperly narrowed several claim terms—including ‘back channel’ and ‘centralized processing station’—to specific features described in the specification rather than construing them according to their plain and ordinary meaning as understood by a skilled artisan.
The Federal Circuit vacated the PTAB’s written description rejection of e-cigarette patent claims directed to a heater-length range, holding that in predictable arts a narrower claimed range can be adequately supported by a broader disclosed range without requiring explicit disclosure of the specific narrower range—and that prior art statements made for unrelated purposes do not automatically establish motivation to combine.
The Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB, holding that operating manuals distributed to a limited number of customers with confidentiality notices still qualify as ‘printed publications’ and prior art under § 102, because the relevant inquiry is whether interested members of the public could locate the document through reasonable diligence—not whether the document was widely distributed.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB’s refusal to register EVERYBODY VS. RACISM as a trademark for apparel, holding that the phrase functions as an informational, anti-racist message rather than as a source identifier — and confirming that widespread use of a phrase in an informational context undermines trademark registration.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the ITC’s finding that Universal Electronics satisfied the domestic industry requirement under Section 337 based on its investments in QuickSet technology — a patented component integrated into televisions — even though those investments did not cover the entire television product.
The Federal Circuit held that the statutory prohibition barring time-barred, joined IPR parties from introducing new issues into a proceeding does not apply when a patent owner files a motion to amend its claims—a joined party may oppose such a motion even if it could not have raised new issues in the merits phase, because the patent owner itself opened the door to new issues by proposing amended claims.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that a settlement agreement’s forum selection clause requiring patent disputes to be filed in Delaware federal court did not bar Abbott from filing inter partes review petitions after the agreement’s covenant-not-to-challenge period expired—because the agreement had expressly permitted IPRs during the covenant period in certain circumstances, indicating the parties understood IPR as a distinct proceeding.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s claim construction of ‘storage element’ based on inventor lexicography in an incorporated-by-reference patent, holding that the PTAB is not bound by a conflicting district court construction and that Intel’s reply arguments were proper because they responded to a new claim construction first raised in the patent owner’s response.
The Federal Circuit affirmed that generic drug manufacturers who carve out patented indications from their drug labels—the so-called ‘skinny label’ strategy—do not infringe method-of-use patents covering those omitted indications under the Hatch-Waxman Act, and that brand-name companies cannot use narrow method patents to extend exclusivity beyond an approved indication.