| 22-919 |
Stephen Thaler v. Katherine K. Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2023-03-21 |
Denied |
Amici (3)Response Waived |
artificial-intelligence innovation-rights invention inventor inventor-definition patent patent-act patent-eligibility patent-law standing statutory-interpretation |
Does the Patent Act categorically restrict the statutory term 'inventor' to human beings alone? |
| 22-544 |
Innovation Sciences, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc., et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2022-12-14 |
Denied |
Response Waived |
35-usc-102 anticipation anticipatory-reference clear-and-convincing clear-and-convincing-evidence invention patent patent-infringement patent-invalidity prior-art |
Whether an inference that a device that could have existed before the invention thereof by an inventor is properly treated as an anticipatory referenc… |
| 20-7267 |
Kevin L. Martin v. Cathleen Capron, et al. |
Seventh Circuit |
2021-03-01 |
Dismissed |
Response WaivedIFP |
35-usc-112 court-of-appeals enablement invention patent prior-art |
Whether the court of appeals erred in finding that the claimed invention meets the enablement requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112 |
| 20-1110 |
Sandoz Inc., et al. v. Immunex Corporation, et al. |
Federal Circuit |
2021-02-12 |
Denied |
Amici (1) |
biosimilar-product double-patenting exclusivity federal-circuit invention obviousness obviousness-type-double-patenting patent patent-exclusivity patent-ownership substantial-rights |
May the patent owner avoid the rule against double patenting by buying all of the substantial rights to a second, later-expiring patent for essentiall… |
| 18-823 |
ZUP, LLC v. Nash Manufacturing, Inc. |
Federal Circuit |
2018-12-28 |
Denied |
Amici (1)Response Waived |
invention invention-evaluation legal-analysis long-felt-need non-obviousness obviousness obviousness-standard patent patent-invalidity patent-law prima-facie prior-art rebuttal secondary-considerations |
Whether evidence of 'secondary considerations' is less important in rebutting prima facie evidence of obviousness |