The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has resurrected a previous policy that requires parties to a proceeding at the Patent Trial and Appeals Board to disclose all the parties of interest in the proceeding. PTO said this shift is driven in part by national security considerations, but the reversal forces participants in PTAB proceedings to disclose the identity of any affiliates that may have an interest in the outcome lest the petition for an administrative hearing be denied.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has proposed to limit the use of administrative challenges to patents when the patent in dispute is already the subject of litigation in district court, a change that many in the life sciences might see as an improvement over the current hyper-litigious environment.
While the final word has yet to be written, Stryker Corp. came out the biggest winner in a dispute involving four related patents owned by Osteomed LLC, part of Colson Associates’ Acumed.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has reacted to the Federal Circuit’s decision in Shockwave v. CLSI with a policy memo that draws tighter lines around the use of applicant admitted prior art in attempts to invalidate a patent during inter partes reviews.
The med tech patent wars opened a new front in the region of screening tests for colorectal cancer, pitting Exact Sciences Corp., of Madison, Wisc., against St. Louis-based Geneoscopy Inc.
Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board “should never cancel claims it has not determined to be unpatentable as a sanction” for misconduct during a board proceeding, according to the acting director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).
The renal denervation patent wars are now in full swing, with subsidiaries of Medtronic plc and Recor Medical LLC, landing the first blow in this chapter of the med tech patent struggles.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has reversed a 2022 agency memorandum on discretionary denials of patent procedures, such as inter partes reviews.
Ravgen Inc. prevailed in a hearing at the Federal Circuit over Labcorp Inc., seemingly bringing a close to a long-running dispute over patents for non-invasive prenatal tests. Ravgen has won damages that will likely exceed $400 million over alleged infringement of its patents for these tests, proof once again that a solid understanding of prior art is essential to avoid costly litigation.
Sometimes a court cites long-standing precedent in deciding how to handle a case, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit leveraged a decision it rendered only last year in deciding a patent case between Apple Inc., and Omni Medsci Inc.
