Monthly Archives: March 2016

Warner Chilcott Company, LLC et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2015-1588 LOURIE, DYK, HUGHES March 18, 2016 Non-precedential Brief Summary: The FC panel found no error with the DC’s conclusion of obviousness (“pharmaceutically effective absorption would have been a logical and obtainable goal with bioavailability that is significantly … Continue reading

Posted in Obviousness | Leave a comment

ULF Bamberg et al. v. Jodi A. Dalvey et al.

Docket No. 2015-1548 MOORE, HUGHES, STOLL March 9, 2016 Brief Summary: Board decision in an interference that Bamberg’s specification did not disclose the claimed subject matter (“Bamberg…specifically distinguished white layers that melt below 220oC as producing an ‘undesired’ result”) and … Continue reading

Posted in Interference, Written description | Leave a comment

In re: Queen’s University at Kingston, Parteq Research and Development Innovations

Docket No. 2015-145 LOURIE, O’MALLEY, REYNA (D) March 7, 2016 Brief Summary: “Patent-agent privilege” exists for those activities “reasonably necessary and incident to the preparation and prosecution of patent appplications or other proceeding before the Office involving a patent application … Continue reading

Posted in Privilege | Leave a comment

Coalition for Affordable Drugs (ADROCA), LLC v. Acorda Therapeutics, Inc.

IPR2015-01857 U.S. Pat. No. 8,663,685 B2 March 10, 2016 Brief Summary: IPR against US 8,663,685B2 encompassing Acorda’s Ampyra® product (dalfampridine (4-aminopyridine)) used in the treatment of multiple sclerosis (2015 full-year sales of $436 million) instituted on obviousness grounds based on … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness | Leave a comment

In re: Samir Varma and InvestPic, LLC v. IBM and SAS

Docket Nos. 2015-1502, -1667 WALLACH, CLEVENGER, TARANTO March 10, 2016 Brief Summary: Board invalidity decision vacated due to erroneous claim construction determinations (e.g., Board improperly “relied on the claims’ use of the term ‘comprising’” because use of the term “does … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction | Leave a comment

Luminara Worldwide, LLC v. Liown Electronics Co. et al.

Docket No. 2015-1671 MOORE, O’MALLEY, TARANTO February 29, 2016 Brief Summary: Luminara found to possess “substantially all rights” in Disney’s patent such that joinder was not required. Preliminary injunction was vacated due to error in DC’s claim construction. Summary: Liown … Continue reading

Posted in Assignment / Ownership, Claim Construction, Licensing | Leave a comment

EON Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Spring Networks, Inc.

Docket No. 2015-1237 PROST, BRYSON(D), HUGHES February 29, 2016 Brief Summary: DC denial of JMOL of no infringement reversed because court erred by failing to construe “portable” and “mobile” other than stating the terms had their plain and ordinary meaning. … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction | Leave a comment