This case addresses two primary issues (i) whether the district court erred in construing the claim term “composition” in FMC’s pesticide patents to mean only “stable compositions,” based on disclosures found in a provisional application and a related patent, even though the asserted patents contained no stability language and (ii) whether the district court misapplied
Intellectual Property Law Blog
Up-to-date Information on Intellectual Property Law
Latest from Intellectual Property Law Blog
Federal Circuit Reins In Prosecution Disclaimer in Maquet v. Abiomed
This case addresses whether the district court correctly applied prosecution disclaimer to (i) import a negative limitation into a child patent claim based on prosecution of a related parent patent with materially different claim language, and (ii) read a further negative limitation about a guide wire’s path into two claims based largely on examiner statements…
Not A Categorical Ban: Federal Circuit Narrowed Spectrum of Patent Eligible Machine Learning Claims
Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., No. 23-2437 (Fed. Cir. 2025) – On April 18, 2025, the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of the case on the ground that the patents were ineligible under § 101. …
The Federal Circuit Remands for a New Trial After Finding Untimely Expert Disclosure
Topic:
The Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s admission of D R Burton Healthcare’s expert testimony due to untimely disclosure and unreliability under the Federal Rules of Evidence 702. The Federal Circuit also reversed the district court’s decision denying a new trial on infringement.
Background:
The case involves Trudell Medical International Inc. (Trudell) as the…
PTAB Overly Relied on Statements of Doubt in Determining Conception and Reduction to Practice in Interference Proceedings
In Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc., the Federal Circuit addressed the issue of conception and reduction to practice as related to the written description of multiple patent applications.…
No Mulligans: Frivolous Post-Judgment Motion Triggers § 1927 Sanctions After § 285 Award
This case addresses whether the district court abused its discretion in awarding attorneys’ fees to Google under 35 U.S.C. § 285 after deeming EscapeX’s suit “exceptional,” denying EscapeX’s Rule 59(e) motion to amend the fee judgment based on purported “newly discovered evidence,” and imposing additional fees against EscapeX and its counsel, under 28 U.S.C. §…
Claim Construction: Indefinite or Clerical Error?
This Federal Circuit opinion analyzes the “very demanding standard” of judicial correction of erroneous wording of a patent claim.…
Federal Circuit Upends Two Infringement Judgments
By Sam Smith*
In Smartrend Manufacturing Group (SMG), Inc. v. Opti-Luxx Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated a finding of design patent infringement due to an erroneous claim construction. The panel also reversed the district court’s denial of JMOL on infringement under the doctrine of equivalents (DOE), finding the accused products failed to perform a function required by the…
USPTO’s Proposed “One and Done” IPR Rule: Rethinking Finality, Fairness, and Efficiency
The USPTO’s recently published notice of proposed rulemaking (RIN 0651-AD89, Docket No. PTO-P-2025-0025) for inter partes review (IPR) proceedings seeks to curb multiple IPR challenges to the same patent. This aligns with the USPTO’s recent and decisive shift toward limiting accessibility of IPRs as a means to challenge patents outside of the district courts. While…
USPTO’s Automated Search Pilot Program: Early Prior Art Insights—Promises and Pitfalls for Patent Applicants
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is rolling out a new Automated Search Pilot Program, offering applicants a first-of-its-kind opportunity to receive a pre-examination, AI-generated prior art search report. The program’s stated goals are to improve prosecution efficiency and the quality of patent examination by providing an Automated Search Results Notice (ASRN)…