Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Patents

  • April 17, 2026

    3rd Circuit: Janssen Didn’t Show Irreparable Harm From Patent Settlement Breach

    PHILADELPHIA — A Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a New Jersey federal judge’s denial of a preliminary injunction requested by appellants Johnson & Johnson and Janssen Biotech Inc., agreeing that the appellants had failed to show irreparable harm caused through Samsung Bioepis Co. Ltd. by an alleged breach of the settlement in an earlier patent dispute.

  • April 17, 2026

    Judge Wrongly Granted JMOL In Antibody Patent Row After Verdict, Panel Finds

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 16 reversed a Massachusetts federal judge’s grant of judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) of invalidity on patents held by Teva Pharmaceuticals International GmbH and its American affiliate for lack of written description and enablement; the panel found that a reasonable jury could have found that the invention involved a well-known class of antibodies, rather than a novel genus.

  • April 16, 2026

    Federal Circuit Says Tech Company Established Patent Claims’ Territoriality

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel reversed a California federal judge’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of Intel Corp., holding that a stipulation between Intel and the patent holder establishes a U.S. nexus, contrary to the judge’s finding of extraterritoriality.

  • April 16, 2026

    Source Code In Patent Case Not Hearsay, Federal Circuit Panel Agrees

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a Utah federal judge’s finding that certain claims of a patent describing a system of programming vehicle controllers were invalid in view of a prior art reference that was on sale before the claimed device’s “critical date”; the panel rejected the appellant’s argument that the judge relied on inadmissible evidence in reaching the decision.

  • April 16, 2026

    Federal Circuit Finds Company Lacked Standing To Appeal Amendment Of Patent

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An appellant technology company failed to demonstrate a sufficient risk of injury in fact based on the risk of future litigation stemming from substitute patent claims, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held, dismissing the company’s appeal that challenged a U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision to allow amendment of the patent.

  • April 15, 2026

    Petitioner Cites Cox In Reply Brief In High Court ‘Skinny Label’ Patent Row

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A petitioner bioequivalent pharmaceutical maker that is arguing to the U.S. Supreme Court that a patent holder’s complaint failed to state a claim for induced infringement because the “skinny label” generic version of the patent carved out the patented cardiovascular use of the drug is pointing to a recent high court ruling that cleared an internet service provider of vicarious liability for copyright infringement on the part of its customers.

  • April 14, 2026

    PTAB’s Invalidation Of Voice Command Patent Affirmed By Federal Circuit

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a win for Roku Inc. in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings the company sought, rejecting an appellant technology company’s argument that the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) adopted a theory introduced by Roku for the first time in a reply brief.

  • April 10, 2026

    Federal Circuit Agrees With PTAB: Manual Is Anticipating Prior Art Reference

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) did not improperly conclude that a user guide for a web security system is a publicly accessible prior art reference, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held; the panel also affirmed PTAB’s finding that the user guide thus anticipates all claims of a patent describing a decryption system.

  • April 10, 2026

    Judge Finds Mobile Game Patent Claims Invalid As Abstract, Tosses Suit

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A federal judge in Delaware granted a motion for a judgment on the pleadings from the maker of massively successful mobile phone video games like Pokémon GO, agreeing with the company that a patent asserted against the game studio was invalid for being directed at the abstract concept of determining a player’s location.

  • April 08, 2026

    Federal Circuit: ITC’s Claim Construction Rightly Led To Anticipation Finding

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel held that U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) correctly denied relief to an air conditioning patent holder that claimed that certain products imported into the United States infringed its patents; the panel affirmed findings that certain claims of the patent were invalid as anticipated, while the remaining claims required elements that the accused products lacked.

  • April 07, 2026

    Patent Invalid For Failing To Name Unreachable Inventor, Appeals Court Agrees

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In what it described as a matter of first impression, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed an Indiana federal judge’s findings that a fencing manufacturer could not correct a patent to add the name of an undisputed co-inventor who could not be contacted because the co-inventor was a “party concerned” for correction proceedings; the panel also agreed that the patents were invalid for omitting the co-inventor.

  • April 03, 2026

    Federal Circuit: PTAB Partly Erred In Consideration Of Tesla-Led IPR

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) wrongly construed some claims but correctly construed others during inter partes review (IPR) proceedings initiated by Tesla Inc. regarding a patent describing electric vehicle charging systems, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled, leading the panel to affirm some of PTAB’s findings but vacate and reverse others.

  • April 02, 2026

    Patent Applicant Explicitly Disclaimed Prior Art Reference, Federal Circuit Agrees

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Texas federal judge rightly granted summary judgment of noninfringement in favor of defendant-appellee entities accused of infringing a patent describing air purifying technology because the patent applicant explicitly narrowed the scope of patent claims during prosecution history to exclude the type of reflective surfaces present in the accused devices, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled April 1.

  • April 01, 2026

    Appellee, Amicus: Rehearing Needed To Pin Down Patent Witness Rules

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An amicus curiae public interest law firm argues in its March 31 brief that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should grant a petition for rehearing en banc by DePuy Synthes Sales Inc. and related DePuy entities, echoing DePuy’s claims that a split panel’s decision to reverse a Pennsylvania federal court’s exclusion of two expert witnesses’ testimony on induced infringement constitutes a departure from recent Federal Circuit en banc precedent.

  • April 01, 2026

    Personalized Ads Patent Claim Invalid As Abstract, Appeals Court Agrees

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on March 31 held that a California federal judge correctly ruled that the asserted claim of a technology company that accused TikTok Inc. and related entities of infringement was invalid as abstract for lack of details on how to implement the claim; the panel agreed that the asserted claim does no more than describe the abstract concept of personalizing content based on a user’s profile.

  • March 31, 2026

    Amici Medical Companies To High Court: Affirm ‘Skinny Label’ Infringement Finding

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Biopharmaceutical company Sanofi was one of multiple entities to file amicus curiae briefs in the U.S. Supreme Court in support of respondent biopharmaceutical entities in a dispute over the standard for the inducement of infringement to be applied in medical patent cases, including “skinny label cases” involving allegedly noninfringing use.  Sanofi tells the court that a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals finding that the patent holders plausibly stated an infringement claim should be affirmed.

  • March 30, 2026

    Supreme Court Rejects Cert Bid For CRISPR Patent Validity Ruling

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on March 30 denied a petition for a writ of certiorari from a biotechnology company that told the high court that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals wrongly shifted the burden of proof to the patentee; the Supreme Court thus left in place the Federal Circuit’s affirmaance of a U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that rendered claims of the company’s patents describing gene-editing technologies invalid as anticipated.

  • March 30, 2026

    PTAB Right To Find Email Filter Patent Obvious, Federal Circuit Holds

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel affirmed a final written decision by the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that multiple claims of an inventor’s patent describing a system for filtering electronic messages are unpatentable as obvious, finding substantial evidence to support a finding that a prior art system teaches relevant claim limitations.

  • March 27, 2026

    Federal Circuit: Patent Plaintiff Can’t Refile Suit To Avoid ITC Deadline

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals held on March 26 that a biopharmaceutical company cannot circumvent missing a 30-day deadline to seek a mandatory stay of a declaratory judgment patent suit it brought under statutes governing the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) by dismissing and then refiling its complaint.

  • March 26, 2026

    Judge Again Finds Patent Claims Against Sirius XM Estopped

    WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware federal judge ruled after a bench trial that Sirius XM Radio Inc. (SXM) reasonably relied on silence from a German research entity to believe it would not bring claims regarding its patents covering satellite radio technology; a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel determined last year that the silence was misleading.

  • March 26, 2026

    Company To High Court: Federal Circuit Used Wrong Standard For Sanctions

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A patent-holding company is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to consider a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling affirming more than $250,000 in attorney fees and other sanctions for filing a patent infringement suit against Google LLC that a California federal judge dismissed as frivolous; the technology company argues that the Federal Circuit affirmed the sanctions under the incorrect standard.

  • March 26, 2026

    Biotech Company To Federal Circuit: Rehearing Needed For DNA Eligibility

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The maker of a gene therapy product is seeking en banc rehearing of a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals finding that a Delaware federal judge wrongly concluded that a patent’s claims involving genetically engineered cultured host cells containing a recombinant nucleic acid molecule were directed to a natural phenomenon; the petitioner tells the Federal Circuit that its opinion creates a sweeping rule regarding the patentability of creation that stems from natural DNA.

  • March 25, 2026

    Federal Circuit Rejects Bid To Rethink Claims Nintendo Infringed Handheld Patent

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals rejected a gaming company’s petition for rehearing en banc or panel rehearing, leaving in place a panel’s January opinion that held that Nintendo Co. Ltd. does not infringe the plaintiff-appellant’s patent.

  • March 24, 2026

    High Court Won’t Consider Federal Circuit-Affirmed Sanctions In IP Dispute

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on March 23 rejected a patent-holding company’s request that it consider the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ affirmance of a Florida federal judge’s entry of sanctions against it in a false advertising and unfair competition dispute.

  • March 23, 2026

    High Court Allows Government Participation In ‘Skinny-Label’ Patent Row

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on March 23 granted the U.S. government’s motion to participate in oral arguments when it considers the standard for the inducement of infringement to be applied in medical patent cases, including in “skinny label cases” involving allegedly noninfringing use; on March 20, the patent-holding biopharmaceutical entities filed their merits brief, arguing that statements made by a bioequivalent maker plausibly allege induced infringement.