Apple v. Masimo and the ITC: a test of patent rights, product design, and trade enforcement
Patent lawyers watching the Apple v. Masimo case unfold at the Federal Circuit are seeing a live example of key issues in US patent enforcement. These include the scope of ITC exclusion orders, the role of product design in infringement analysis, and the growing trend...
Government launches SEPs consultation to boost UK innovation
The UK Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) has today launched a consultation on potential measures to address challenges in the UK's Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) ecosystem. A patent that protects technology that is essential to implementing a technical standard...
Trade secrets and software: secrecy over public right to exclude
As software systems become central to business innovation, trade secret law is crucial for protecting them. The need to protect software and algorithms presents unique challenges for businesses that have long relied on patent protection. The nature of software often...
What do patent drafting and Jell-O™ have in common?
If predicting the future were easy, most readers of The Patent Lawyer would be using their powers to buy lottery tickets, not keeping abreast of global patent law updates. Predicting the future, however, is precisely the task attorneys are faced with when drafting a...
Delhi High Court holds “algorithms” and “computer program” not patentable
This article discusses an appeal filed by Kroll Information Assurance, LLC (Appellant), against the order of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks (CG). The appeal concerns the refusal of an Indian Patent Application No. 8100/DELNP/2007 for a...
Osseo Imaging, LLC v. Planmeca US Inc.: is “timing of acquiring the skill” relevant when ascertaining an expert?
In the ever-evolving test of obviousness, what has been consistently critical is the technical opinion of the expert or “person skilled in the art” (PSITA). Identifying who this expert is for a particular patent/invention is, therefore, critical. A creative leap was...
Steuben Foods accuses Shibuya Hoppmann Corp. of patent infringement in bottling process
The case of Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppmann Corporation focused on the alleged patent infringement of claims of the US Patent No. 6,209,591, No. 6,536,188, and No. 6,702,985 owned by Steuben and related to the operation of machinery used in the bottling...
The UPC’s jurisdiction to determine damages after a post-national judgment
On January 16, 2025, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) retained jurisdiction to rule on the determination of damages following a finding of infringement by a national court and also to rule on acts before it entered into force. The UPC thus continues to resist all...
Clarivate identifies top 50 universities powering global innovation
Clarivate, a leading global provider of transformative intelligence, today released The top 50 universities powering global innovation report, which analyzes the critical role of research in shaping global industrial innovation and societal impact, using data and...
Lynk Labs v. Samsung: published patent applications as prior art in IPR proceedings
On January 14, 2025, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential ruling in Lynk Labs, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. concerning the earliest date a cited patent application publication (PUB) can be relied on as prior art in an...
DDR Holdings v. Priceline.com: a cautionary tale for provisional applicants
In US patent law, a provisional application is a 'placeholder' that allows an applicant to file without a formal patent claim, often before the idea is fully developed, to secure an earlier priority date. However, provisional applications are typically low-budget...
UKIPO launches new patent search tool to boost UK innovation
Today’s launch is part of the UK Intellectual Property Office's (UKIPO) major digital transformation. A new online search tool for UK patents launched today will make it easier for businesses and innovators to search and access patent information, supporting UK...
The second case of “calling for third-party opinions”
The procedure of calling for third-party opinions was introduced on April 1, 2022, in patent and utility model infringement suits. In the second case under the proceeding, the Intellectual Property High Court (IPHC) issued a request for opinions with a deadline of...
Revocation petition maintainable though no live patent subsisting: Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd v. Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma
Macleods Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the petitioner, is engaged in manufacturing and marketing diverse pharmaceutical products, including anti-diabetic drugs. The respondent, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, is a company organized under the laws of Germany and...
Delhi High Court reaffirm a ‘method of treatment of plants’ would not fall under the purview of ‘method of agriculture’
The BASF judgment: how timing uncertainty impacts divisional patent applications in India
Nike leads way in footwear patent filings as manufacturers compete in ‘running shoe arms race’
No Results Found
The page you requested could not be found. Try refining your search, or use the navigation above to locate the post.