Who Watches the Watchmen? Supreme Court to Decide Fate of Administrative Patent Judge Appointments

The Supreme Court of the United States is to decide the fate of administrative patent judges of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, namely whether the current appointment scheme violates the Appointments Clause of the U.S. Constitution. This case, which may have broad implications on post-grant proceeding process before the USPTO, is being watched by companies around the world.

To read the full text of this Duane Morris Alert, please visit the firm website.

Forum Selection Clause Held Inapplicable for Precluding Inter Partes Review Before the Patent and Trial Appeal Board

Confidentiality agreements or nondisclosure agreements (NDAs) are generally one of the first documents that in-house counsel require teams to execute when exploring licensing and/or research opportunities with third parties. NDAs are meant to protect the confidential information of one or both parties while each party determines whether the collaboration is worth pursuing. However, in a recent case in the Southern District of New York, one party tried to invoke a forum selection clause of an NDA to prevent the other party from challenging patents using inter partes review at the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

To read the full text of this Duane Morris Alert, please visit the firm website.

Numerical Ranges: More Than Just Endpoints in Patent Process

On February 11 and 12, 2020, the United States Patent and Trademark Office held a series of webinars covering the interpretation of ranges during the prosecution of patent applications. The following is a brief report and summary of the covered material.

Numerical ranges provide more than just two particular endpoints for a set of data within patent applications. The interpretation of a claimed numerical range when compared with disclosed numerical ranges in the prior art, assuming the claimed invention recites the other limitations of the prior art, can form the basis for an anticipation rejection based on 35 U.S.C. § 102, an obviousness rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103, or an alternative grounds rejection under both 35 U.S.C. §§ 102/103.

View the full Alert on the Duane Morris LLP website.