Not since Lighting Ballast has the en banc Federal Circuit issued as remarkable an opinion as in the recent Lexmark case. [FN*] It will be recalled that in Lighting Ballast ...
By my estimation, somewhere around 85% of all Section 2(e)(1) mere descriptiveness refusals that go to final decision at the TTAB are affirmed. Well, here are four appeals that were ...
A brilliant certiorari petition in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc., Supreme Ct. No. 15-1189, is expected to pave the way for grant of certiorari to review the split ...
Yesterday in Mag Aerospace Industries, Inc. v. B/E Aerospace, Inc., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. Mr. 23, 2016)(Prost, C.J.), in the course of an affirmance of noninfringement of a vacuumless ...
The U.S Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit has vacated the FLANAX decision of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (here), and has remanded the ...
The Sequenom petition continues to draw fire. There simply is no preemption of the use of any DNA in the Sequenom invention, but the Question Presentedcontains an admission that there ...
Today in Shaw Indus. Grp., Inc. v. Automated Creel Sys., Inc., __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2016)(Moore, J.), the Court provides added implicit support for reintroduction of “undue multiplicity” as basis to ...
Three questions have been raised concerning the controversial Question Presented in the Sequenom petition: (a) “What is the new combination of known techniques?" (b) “What is the previously impossible result?” ...
Torrefazione Italia LLC opposed the application of Trinidad Coffee Company, Inc. to register the mark shown to the right, for coffee, claiming likelihood of confusion with the two marks shown ...
Based upon the uniquely stated Question Presented in Sequenom, Inc. v. Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc., Supreme Court No. 15-1182, the relevant issue for the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries is now whether one ...