Month: December 2025
Jepson Claims Face Higher Written Description Bar in In re Xencor, Inc.
December 2, 2025
In re Xencor, Inc Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the rejection of Xencor, Inc.’s patent application (U.S. Patent Application No. 16/803,690) for failing to provide an adequate written description, particularly focusing on…
Read MoreStanding Roadblock: Incyte’s Patent Appeal Dismissed for Lack of Concrete Plans
December 2, 2025
Incyte Corp. v. Sun Pharm. Indus., Inc Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit dismissed Incyte Corporation’s appeal in its patent dispute with Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, Inc., highlighting the strict requirements for Article III standing…
Read MorePatent Invalidity Upheld: Public Use and IPR Estoppel Clarified in Ingenico v. IOENGINE
December 2, 2025
Ingenico Inc. v. Ioengine, LLC Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a significant decision for patent law, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict that found several claims of IOENGINE’s patents invalid, providing important guidance on what counts as “public…
Read MoreFederal Circuit Clarifies “Pull Cord” in Tactical Vest Patent Dispute
December 2, 2025
IQRIS Techs. LLC v. Point Blank Enters Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit addressed how the term “pull cord” should be interpreted in a patent dispute between IQRIS Technologies LLC and Point Blank Enterprises,…
Read MoreCourt Limits Patent Injunctions on Clinical Trials and FDA Applications in Jazz v. Avadel
December 2, 2025
Jazz Pharms., Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharms., LLC Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky A recent decision in Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Avadel CNS Pharmaceuticals, LLC provides important guidance on how far patent owners can go in blocking competitors from conducting…
Read MorePatent Owners Get a Win: Federal Circuit Limits Collateral Estoppel from PTAB Decisions
December 2, 2025
Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a significant decision for patent owners, the Federal Circuit recently clarified when a prior Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision can prevent a patentee from asserting…
Read MoreCourt Clarifies What Counts as “Domestic Industry” for Patent Protection at the ITC
December 2, 2025
Lashify, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a significant decision for patent owners who manufacture their products overseas, the Federal Circuit in Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission clarified what activities can qualify as a…
Read MoreFederal Circuit Clarifies Limits of Prosecution Disclaimer in Maquet v. Abiomed Patent Dispute
December 2, 2025
Maquet Cardiovascular LLC v. Abiomed Inc. Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit vacated a lower court’s ruling in the patent dispute between Maquet Cardiovascular LLC and Abiomed Inc., providing important guidance on how prosecution…
Read MorePatent Term Extensions for Reissued Patents: Merck v. Aurobindo Clarifies the Rules
December 2, 2025
Merck Sharp & Dohme B.V. v. Aurobindo Pharma USA, Inc Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a significant decision for pharmaceutical patent holders, the Federal Circuit has clarified how patent term extensions (PTEs) apply to reissued patents in the case…
Read MoreFederal Circuit Clarifies Limits on Using “Admitted Prior Art” in Patent Challenges
December 2, 2025
Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a significant decision for patent law, the Federal Circuit has clarified how “applicant admitted prior art” (AAPA) can—and cannot—be used in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings. The case involved…
Read MoreFederal Circuit Says Applying Machine Learning to New Fields Isn’t Enough for a Patent
December 2, 2025
Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit tackled whether simply using machine learning in a new context—like TV scheduling or network mapping—can make an invention eligible for a patent.…
Read MoreFederal Circuit Clarifies: Patent Claims Listing Separate Ingredients Require Separate Components
December 2, 2025
Regeneron Pharms., Inc. v. Mylan Pharms. Inc Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed that when a patent claim lists components separately—like a “VEGF antagonist” and a “buffer”—those elements must be distinct in the…
Read More