United States: Federal Circuit Patent Updates - June 2017

Last Updated: June 28 2017
Article by WilmerHale

Nexlearn, LLC v. Allen Interactions, Inc. (No. 2016-2107, -2221, 6/19/17) (Moore, Schall, Hughes)

June 19, 2017 10:09 AM

Moore, J. Affirming dismissal due to lack of personal jurisdiction. .

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

The Cleveland Clinic v. True Health Diagnostics LLC (No. 2016-1766, 6/16/17) (Lourie, Reyna, Wallach)

June 16, 2017 3:34 PM

Reyna, J. Affirming decision that claims relating to "testing for myeloperoxidase [MPO] in a bodily sample" and "treating a patient that has cardiovascular disease" are not directed to patent-eligible subject matter. The district court did not err in addressing only representative claims. "Each limitation [raised by the patentee], however, merely recites known methods of detecting MPO or MPO derivatives and applies the correlation between these biomarkers and cardiovascular health. Where, as here, the claims 'are substantially similar and linked to the same' law of nature, analyzing representative claims is proper." Also, "it was appropriate for the district court to determine that the testing patents were ineligible under § 101 at the motion to dismiss stage." Also affirming dismissal of contributory and induced infringement claims. "A party that provides a service, but no 'material or apparatus,' cannot be liable for contributory infringement."

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Outdry Technologies v. Geox S.P.A. (No. 2016-1769, 6/16/17) (Dyk, Moore, Reyna)

June 16, 2017 11:22 AM

Moore, J. Affirming Board decision in IPR that claims relating to waterproofing leather are obvious.

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Emerachem Holdings, LLC v. Volkswagen Group of America (No. 2016-1984, 6/15/17) (Moore, Clevenger, Chen)

June 15, 2017 9:41 AM

Moore, J. Affirming Board decision in IPR that some claims are obvious and remanding for other claims. The Board did not err in rejecting an inventor's declaration and finding the inventor's work to be prior art under § 102(e). "We do not hold that corroboration of an inventor's declaration is required in every case, but we recognize that corroborating an inventor's testimony is a well-established principle in our case law." Regarding the remanded claims, "the Board violated the APA's requirements of notice and an opportunity to respond with regard to [a prior art reference]... Because we are unable to discern whether the Board found [that another prior art reference] does not disclose the dependent limitations in [some claims] we vacate the Board's decision as to these claims and remand for clarification." "Where the petitioner uses certain prior art references to target specific claims with precision, or the Board does the same in its decision to institute, the patent owner is directed to particular bases for alleged obviousness. A general statement that lists all challenged claims and all asserted prior art is not a separate, additional articulation that each of the claims may be obvious over any combination of all listed prior art."

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

One-E-Way, Inc. v. ITC (No. 2016-2105, 6/12/17) (Prost, Wallach, Stoll)

June 15, 2017 5:51 PM

Stoll, J. Reversing decision of indefiniteness because "the term virtually free from interference, as properly interpreted in light of the specification and prosecution history, would inform a person of ordinary skill in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty... While [patentee] did not define the scope of the term 'virtually free from interference' in a technical sense as both the ALJ and Respondents would seemingly require, the lack of a technical definition does not render the term indefinite." Prost, J. dissented.

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. (No. 2015-1039, -1195, 6/12/17)

June 15, 2017 3:18 PM

Thomas, J. Affirming that "an injunction under federal law is not available to enforce 42 U.S.C. § 262(l)(2)(A)," which requires that an "applicant seeking FDA approval of a biosimilar must provide its application materials and manufacturing information to the manufacturer of the corresponding biologic within 20 days of the date the FDA notifies the applicant that it has accepted the application for review." Remanding for determination of "whether California law would treat noncompliance with § 262(l)(2)(A) as 'unlawful.'" Also reversing regarding a question of "whether the applicant must give notice to the manufacturer after, rather than before, obtaining a license from the FDA for its biosimilar. We conclude that an applicant may provide notice before obtaining a license."

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services (No. 2016-2001, 6/9/17) (Dyk, Mayer, Reyna)

June 9, 2017 9:20 AM

Dyk, J. Affirming Board decision in CBM proceeding that claims are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter. "We conclude that 35 U.S.C. § 325(e)(1) does not apply in a subsequent proceeding to claims upon which the Board declined to institute review." Also, the Court had jurisdiction to hear patentee's challenge to the Board's decision that the petitioner was not estopped from seeking CBM review of the challenged claims. Mayer, J. dissented "from the court's determination that we have jurisdiction to review a decision by the [Board] to deny a motion to terminate a post-grant review proceeding as barred by 35 U.S.C. § 325(e)(1)."

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

New World International, Inc. v. Ford Global Technologies, LLC (No. 2016-2097, 6/8/17) (Prost, Bryson, Wallach)

June 8, 2017 3:36 PM

Bryson, J. Affirming dismissal due to lack of personal jurisdiction.

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Skky, Inc. v. Mindgeek, S.A.R.L. (No. 2016-2018, 6/7/17) (Lourie, Reyna, Wallach)

June 7, 2017 2:17 PM

Lourie, J. Affirming Board decision in IPR that claims are unpatentable. The Board did not err in concluding that "wireless device means" is not a means-plus-function term because it recites sufficient structure and does not recite functionality. Also, the Board did not err in finding that the claims do not require multiple processors or a specialized processor. Also, the Board did not abuse its discretion in not striking petitioner's reply brief. The reply brief "responded to positions laid out by [patent owner] and the Board."

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Secure Axcess, LLC v. PNC Bank National Association [order denying Pet RHG] (No. 2016-1353, 6/6/17) (Prost, Newman, Plager, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O'Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Chen, Hughes)

June 6, 2017 12:39 PM

Per Curiam. Denying petitions for panel rehearing and for rehearing en banc.

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Rothschild Connected Devices v. Guardian Protection Services (No. 2016-2521, 6/5/17) (Prost, Mayer, Wallach)

June 5, 2017 4:19 PM

Wallach, J. Reversing denial of award of attorney fees to the defendant and remanding. "The District Court clearly erred by failing to consider Rothschild's willful ignorance of the prior art." "The conclusory and unsupported statements from Rothschild's counsel and founder that claim 1 of the '090 patent is valid have no evidentiary value." "[I]n the absence of evidence demonstrating that Rothschild engaged in reasonable conduct before the District Court, the undisputed evidence regarding Rothschild's vexatious litigation warrants an affirmative exceptional case finding here." "The District Court erred as a matter of law when, as part of its analysis, it stated that an attorney fee award under § 285 would 'contravene[] the aims of Rule 11['s]' safe-harbor provision." Mayer, J., concurred.

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Checkpoint Systems, Inc. v. All-Tag Security S.A. (No. 2016-1397, 6/5/17) (Newman, Lourie, Moore)

June 5, 2017 1:40 PM

Newman, J. Reversing finding of an exceptional case and award of attorney fees to the defendant. "'[M]otivation' to harass or burden an opponent may be relevant to an 'exceptional case' finding." "However, motivation to implement the statutory patent right by bringing suit based on a reasonable belief in infringement is not an improper motive." "[T]he record shows that the charge of infringement was reasonable and the litigation was not brought in bad faith or with abusive tactics."

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

Preston v. Nagel (No. 2016-1524, 6/1/17) (Dyk, Taranto, Hughes)

June 1, 2017 11:07 AM

Hughes, J. Dismissing appeal because the district court's remand of the case to state court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction that was appealed was unreviewable pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d).

A full version of the text is available in PDF form.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions