Tag Archives: CAFC

ParkerVision loses appeal of PTAB decision at CAFC

The outcome:ParkerVision, Inc. (“ParkerVision”) appeals fromthree final written decisions of the U.S. Patent Trial andAppeal Board (“Board”) in related inter partes reviewproceedings, in which the Board held certain claims ofU.S. Patent No. 6,091,940 (“the ’940 patent”) unpatentableas obvious under 35 … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

In Align Technology, CAFC finds no substantial evidence from PTAB or appellee ClearCorrect

The outcome:Align Technology, Inc., owns U.S. Patent No.6,699,037. In an inter partes review requested byClearCorrect Operating, LLC, the Patent Trial and AppealBoard determined that claims 1, 2, 9, and 10 areunpatentable. The Board’s determination rested on itsfindings regarding the key … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CAFC Clarifies SAS Impact on Pending Appeals

CAFC Has Jurisdiction Where SAS Relief Waived The impact of the Supreme Court’s decision in SAS Institute has been immediate and far-reaching. As explained last week, the courts have quickly realized the import of this Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The CAFC upholds challenge to Philips patent in LED application area

A use of a light emitting diode in traffic lights was at issue:The ’988 patent describes a circuit arrangement for asignaling light, such as a traffic light, that uses a light emittingdiode (LED), rather than a traditional incandescentlamp, as its … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

CAFC addresses "broadest reasonable interpretation" in Power Integrations; PTAB reversed

PTAB was reversed by the CAFC in Power Integrations:Because the board’s anticipation rejectionswere based on an unreasonably broad claim construction,we reverse.Of specifics:We acknowledged that “the board is not generallybound by a prior judicial construction of a claim term” andthat “in … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment