2022 FCA 118: The appeal court saw no reason to interfere with a trial court decision that favoured MEG Energy in its ongoing patent dispute with inventor Jason Swist.
Travel Sentry, Inc. v David A. Tropp, No. 2021-1908 (Fed. Cir., Feb. 14, 2022). The patents claimed an economic practice and method of organizing human activity, which is not subject-matter that can be protected under the patent system.
Fed. Cir. No. 2020-2044: The Federal Circuit found that the patents were directed to an abstract idea, with no additional elements to transform them into patentable subject-matter.
2021 FCA 154: The FCA held that overbreadth is not an “improper re-emergence of the promise doctrine”. Overbreadth is supported by bargain theory and s. 27 of the Act.
2021 FC 85: The Federal Court upheld the validity of all claims, but found that PetroChina was not infringing Maoz Betser-Zilevitch's patent for an SAGD.
2020 FC 997: In a summary judgement for patent impeachment, Canada's Federal Court found a patent for heating hydraulic booms to be invalid for obviousness.
Fed. Cir. 2018-2097 — The CAFC ruled that Valeant's patent for Relistor(R) is prima facie obvious based on similar compounds with overlapping pH ranges.
2020 FCA 30; 2020 FCA 31 – Janssen and Celltrion will return to court in June after the FCA overturned a lower court decision regarding a Remicade patent.
CAFC 2018-1763 – In fiercely dissented decision, a top US court has invalidated an automotive patent, further extending the reach of the controversial §101.
CAFC 2018-2207 – The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that “wherein” clauses in patent claims can be limiting if they are material to patentability.
AVX Corporation v Presidio Components (Fed. Cir., 2018-1106) A case recently dismissed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) confirms that […]
Fed. Cir., 2016-2222 - CAFC affirms that a patent may be successfully defended if the patent holder can prove that the invention was conceived prior to any similar prior art.