Category Archives: Public Use

DC invalidation of Minerva’s claims for public use at scientific meeting affirmed

Posted on February 17, 2023 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Minvera Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc., Cytyc Surgical Products, LLC Docket No. 2021-2246 (https://cafc.uscourts.gov/opinions-orders/21-2246.OPINION.2-15-2023_2081255.pdf) PROST, REYNA, STOLL February 15, 2023 Brief Summary:   DC finding of Minverva’s claims invalid for public use at a scientific meeting affirmed. Summary:  Minerva appealed … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Conception and Reduction to Practice, Public Accessibility, Public Use | Leave a comment

Board IPR FWD finding Sanofi’s amended claims not unpatentable affirmed

Posted on January 22, 2021 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Mylan Laboratories Limited v. Aventis Pharma S.A. Docket No. 2020-1302 (IPR2016-00712) (http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/20-1302.RULE_36_JUDGMENT.1-15-2021_1718184.pdf) NEWMAN, O’MALLEY, WALLACH January 15, 2020 Brief Summary:  FC panel affirmed Board IPR FWD finding Sanofi’s amended claims not to be unpatentable for obviousness, public use and section … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim Construction, Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness, Patent Eligibility (101), Public Use | Leave a comment

Prior knowledge or use, public use, and on-sale bar holdings reversed (e.g., must be accessible to the public)

Posted on April 15, 2020 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Company, et al. Docket No. 2019-1243 LOURIE, REYNA, HUGHES April 8, 2020 Brief Summary: DC decisions finding prior knowledge or use, public use, and on-sale bar reversed and remanded. Summary: BASF appealed DC decision granted … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), On-Sale Bar, Public Accessibility, Public Use | Leave a comment

Federal Circuit vacates and remands IPR decisions based on public accessibility

Posted on July 16, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Infobridge PTE. Ltd. Docket Nos. 2018-2007, -2012 (IPR2017-00099, -00100) Newman, Schall, O’Malley July 12, 2019 Brief Summary: Board IPR decisions based on no public accessibility vacated and remanded (e.g., “a petitioner need not establish that … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Obviousness, Public Accessibility, Public Use | Leave a comment

Mark A. Barry v. Medtronic, Inc.

Posted on January 30, 2019 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2017-2463 PROST, MOORE, TARANTO January 24, 2019 Brief summary: DC and jury conclusions of no invalidity and infringement affirmed (e.g., the invention was not in “public use” as the use was experimental, no § 102(b) on-sale bar, no … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Conception and Reduction to Practice, Experimental Use, Inducement to Infringe, Inequitable Conduct, Infringement, Preamble, Public Use | Tagged | Leave a comment

Art+Com InnovationPool GmbH v. Google LLC

Posted on October 25, 2017 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket Nos. 2017-1016 LOURIE, O’MALLEY, TARANTO October 20, 2017 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC entry of jury anticipation finding affirmed; finding of no infringement by Google was not reached by the FC panel. Summary: Art+Com (“AC”) appealed DC entry of judgment … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Conception and Reduction to Practice, Public Use | Leave a comment

TransWeb, LLC v. 3M Innovative Properties Company, 3M Company

Posted on February 16, 2016 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1646 DYK, TARANTO, HUGHES February 10, 2016 Brief Summary: Findings of invalidity based on prior public use / obviousness, non-infringement, inequitable conduct, and trebeled damages for antitrust violations affirmed. Summary: Transweb sued for DJ of invalidity and non-infringement … Continue reading →

Posted in Antitrust, Inequitable Conduct, Public Use, Willfullness | Leave a comment

Delano Farms Company et al. v. The California Table Grape Commission et al.

Posted on January 12, 2015 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2014-1030 PROST, BRYSON, HUGHES January 9, 2015 Brief Summary: DC decision that a reasonable jury could not have determined whether members of the public were informed of or could readily discern the public had been put in possession … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Public Use, Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Pronova Biopharma Norge v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, et al.

Posted on September 13, 2013 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket Nos. 2012-1498, -1499 DYK, O’MALLEY, WALLACH September 12, 2013 Non-precedential Brief summary: Anticipating public use found where doctor was provided patented composition without any confidentiality restriction. Summary: Teva appealed DC final judgment for Pronova that its US 5,656,667 and … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Public Use | Leave a comment

Dey, L.P., et al. v. Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Posted on May 31, 2013 by Patrick J. Halloran, Ph.D., J.D.

Docket No. 2012-1428 NEWMAN, BRYSON, O’MALLEY May 20, 2013 Brief summary: Formal confidentiality agreements are not required to prevent invalidation for public use under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) (pre-2011) as long as “there were ‘circumstances creating a similar expectation of secrecy’” … Continue reading →

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Public Use | Leave a comment