A decision whether certiorari has been granted may come as early as 9:30 AM tomorrow (Tuesday) morning. Regards, Hal
Professor Dennis Crouch is now offering the most complete reporting on patent cases at the Supreme Court, including links to briefs, as explained in the box at page 1 of ...
Where an inventor publishes his invention several months before filing his patent application, and there is an intervening third party publication of an obvious variant of the claimed invention, does ...
The previous note concerning the grace period (attached below) raises the question whether the grace period has much value under the Leahy Smith America Invents Act. Until the Federal Circuit ...
Cubist Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Hospira, Inc., Supr. Ct. No. 15-1210, opinion below, 805 F.3d 1112 (Fed. Cir. 2015)(Bryson, J.), is scheduled for Conference today. The First Question Presented asks: “Whether ...
Today in David Netzer Consulting Engineer LLC v. Shell Oil Co., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2016)(Lourie, J.), in the course of affirming a noninfringement ruling, the panel provides an ...
Following a corporate patent career capped by a successful tenure as Chief IP Counsel and Director of the IP Department of the Ciba-Geigy Corporation in its American headquarters, upon retirement ...
Today in In re: Aqua Products, Inc., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2016)(Reyna, J.), in the course of affirming a PTAB unpatentability ruling in an Inter Partes Reexamination proceeding, the ...
The controversy over whether an obvious modification of an invention published by a third party during the grace period is prior art is well known both from the analysis of ...
This morning the Court DENIED certiorari review in this case, without comment. Regards, Hal