Directional claim limitations deprive Topps of sweet sweet victory

Topps-Co.-v.-Koko_s-Confectionery-Nov…d-10990-S.D.N.Y, August 27, 2020 Background The Topps Company (“Topps”) is the owner of US Patent No. US6660316, directed to a candy product having the commercialized embodiment “Juicy Drop Pop” (“JDP”): Claim 1 of the ‘316 patent recites, in pertinent part:  A packaged candy product, comprising: a housing including a front face and a back face, […]

Federal Circuit upholds subject matter eligibility of “method of preparation” claims in rehearing of Illumina v. Ariosa Diagnostics

Illumina v Ariosa rehearing “Method of preparation” claims survive §101 challenge at the Federal Circuit

Federal Circuit affirms PTAB’s use of “common sense” in invalidating BE Aerospace patents directed to airplane lavs

BE Aerospace v C&DZodiac, 2019-1935, 2019-1936, Fed. Cir. June 26, 2020 BE Aerospace (“BEA”) owns US Patent Nos. US9073641 and US9440742 directed to space-saving designs for airport lavatories.  Specifically, the challenged patents both claim a wall portion including first and second recesses to accommodate the aft support legs of an airline seat, and the seat […]

BASF patent gets a second chance at the Federal Circuit

basf-corp-v-snf-holding-company, Appeal No. 2019-1243, Fed. Cir. April 8, 2020. BASF owns US patent 5,633,329 (the “‘329 patent”), directed to an process of preparing super absorbing polymers, which have a tendancy to stick to the walls of the reactor in which they are manufactured.  The ‘329 patent claims a method of making the polymers, using a […]

PTAB Tech Center 1700 Observations, December 2019

The was no merriment for Appellant’s in Tech Center 1700 in December.  After an almost 40% reversal rate in November, PTAB’s reversal rate in Tech Center 1700 was down to about 24% in December: The Board heard 96 appeals, and reversed the Examiner 23 times with one reversal with a new ground of rejection: No […]

Things go from bad to worse for L’Oreal in their multifaceted litigation with Olaplex

In 2018, the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court of Delaware’s refusal to grant Liqwd a preliminary injunction against L’Oreal Liqwd v L’Oreal Preliminary Injunction.  Many reported earlier this summer on L’Oreal’s expensive loss to Olaplex in the District Court of Delaware.  (See, e.g., https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-08-12/l-oreal-owes-startup-91-million-for-stealing-its-trade-secrets).  L’Oreal has now been dealt another blow by the Federal […]

You had me (but apparently not the Federal Circuit) at “propshaft” – Federal Circuit invalidates patent directed to driveshaft technology

In American Axle Manufacturing Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, case number 18-1763, AAM v Neapco the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a grant of summary judgement from the District of Delaware finding American Axle Manufacturing’s (AAM’s) method ineligible for patent protection under 35 USC §101. AAM sued Neapco for patent infringement […]

Prosecution history estoppel does not apply if arguments were “made in a different context”

In MTD Products, Inc. v. Andrei Iancu (MTD), MTD appealed to the Federal Circuit from an IPR decision holding all claims unpatentable of US 8,011,458.  The claims at issue concerned a zero-turn radius vehicle, typically a mower.  The claim term “mechanical control assembly” was at issue and in particular, whether or not the claim term […]

Cookies under the GDPR/PECR

The UK’s ICO has published some guidance (and a tool! https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/where-does-consent-apply-for-cookies/) on the use of cookies that will be helpful to providers/operators of online services under the jurisdiction of the GDPR/PECR.  https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-pecr/guidance-on-the-use-of-cookies-and-similar-technologies/

Warren and Brandeis, “The Right to Privacy,” Harvard Law Review, Vol IV, No. 5, pages 193-219, December 15, 1890

In this article, the soon to be Supreme Court justices argue that a right to privacy is a recognizable property right separate from physical property rights, while also distinguishing it from other intellectual property rights: These considerations lead to the conclusion that the protection afforded to thoughts, sentiments, and emotions, expressed through the medium of […]