Monthly Archives: November 2018

Schlafly et al. v. Saint Louis Brewery, LLC

Docket Nos. 2017-1468 NEWMAN, MAYER, STOLL Nov. 26, 2018 Brief summary: TTAB’s decision that SLB was entitled to register the SCHLAFLY mark on the basis of distinctiveness affirmed since “words that are primarily a surname can be registered trademarks if … Continue reading

Posted in Trademarks | Leave a comment

Invidior Inc. et al. v. Dr. Reddy’s Laboratories, S.A. et al.

Docket Nos. 2018-2167, -21696 NEWMAN (D), LOURIE, STOLL Nov. 20, 2018 (Non-precedential) Brief summary: DC order granting Invidior’s preliminary injunction reversed and remanded (“‘305 patent expressly disclaimed, through remarks in the specification, solely using conventional top air drying” and “claim … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Injunction, Prosecution History Estoppel | Leave a comment

Palo Alto Networks, Inc. v. Finjan, Inc.

Docket Nos. 2017-2314-15 (IPR2015-01979, IPR2016-00151, -00919, -01071) REYNA, SCHALL, STOLL Nov. 19, 2018 (Non-precedential) Brief summary: Board decision in -00151 vacated and remanded for consideration of all grounds raised in PA’s IPR petition under SAS (US 2018); decision in -00179 … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

Tris Pharma, Inc. v. Actavis Laboratories FL, Inc.

Docket Nos. 2017-2557, -2559, -2560 NEWMAN, O’MALLEY, CHEN Nov. 20, 2018 (Non-precedential) Brief summary: DC decision finding Tris’s claims invalid for obviousness vacated and remanded because of “gaps in the [DC’s] opinion and remanding it for further fact-findings”. Summary: Tris … Continue reading

Posted in Generics / ANDA, Obviousness | Leave a comment

Arcelormittal v. AK Steel Corporation

Docket Nos. 2017-1637 REYNA, WALLACH, HUGHES Nov. 14, 2018 (sealed opinion issued Nov. 5, 2018) Brief summary: DC decision of SJ based on collateral estoppel to AK vacated and remanded due to new evidence that the accused products may have … Continue reading

Posted in Collateral estoppel, Issue Preclusion | Leave a comment

Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.

Docket Nos. 2017-1525, -1577 (IPR2015-00978) PROST, SCHALL, CHEN Nov. 9, 2018 Brief summary: Board IPR decision remanded for reconsideration under FC panel’s revised claim construction. Board decision that assignor estoppel does not apply to IPRs affirmed. Summary: Arista and Cisco … Continue reading

Posted in Assignment / Ownership, Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR | Leave a comment

Acceleration Bay, LLC (“AB”) v. Activision Blizzard Inc., et al. (“Blizzard”)

Docket Nos. 2017-2084-5, -2095-99, 2117-8 (relating to 12 IPRs, six FWDs) PROST, MOORE, REYNA Nov. 6, 2018 Brief summary: Board’s decisions finding certain of AB’s claims unpatentable and others patentable affirmed. Summary: AB appealed final written decisions (FWDs) holding certain … Continue reading

Posted in Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness | Leave a comment