Tag: CAFC
-
In re Kostic: Broadened Reissue Claims Rejected Due to Statutory Bar
In In re Kostic, the Federal Circuit recently reinforced the statutory bar against broadening reissue applications filed beyond the two-year limit, emphasizing that claims must be construed based on their actual language rather than an inventor’s subjective intent. Background:Appellants Kostic and Vandevelde sought reissue of U.S. Patent No. 8,494,950, covering methods for buying and selling…
-
Fintiv v. PayPal: Payment Handler Terms Indefinite Under § 112(f)
In Fintiv, Inc. v. PayPal Holdings, Inc., No. 23-2312 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 30, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Western District of Texas’s ruling that the asserted patent claims were invalid as indefinite. The decision underscores the court’s continued enforcement of 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 6 for software-related terms that fail to recite sufficient…
-
In re PT Medisafe Technologies: Federal Circuit Affirms Color Mark as Generic
In In re PT Medisafe Technologies, No. 23-1573 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 29, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s refusal to register a dark green color mark for medical examination gloves, concluding that the color was generic and not eligible for trademark protection. Background Medisafe, a manufacturer and distributor of medical gloves, sought to register…
-
Qualcomm v. Apple: Express Reliance on Applicant Admitted Prior Art Bars IPR Ground
In Qualcomm Inc. v. Apple Inc., Nos. 2023-1208, -1209 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 23, 2025), the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) post-remand decision, holding that the Board erred in allowing Apple’s inter partes review (IPR) ground to proceed based on a misinterpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 311(b). The ruling clarifies the…
-
Marmen Inc. v. United States — Federal Circuit Rejects Commerce’s Use of Cohen’s d Test in Dumping Margin Calculation
In Marmen Inc. v. United States, No. 23-1877 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 22, 2025), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the Department of Commerce’s antidumping duty (AD) determination for utility-scale wind towers from Canada. The decision raises important questions about Commerce’s use of statistical methods in calculating dumping margins, and it reinforces key limitations previously addressed…
-
Dongkuk S&C Co., Ltd. v. United States: Federal Circuit Backs Commerce’s Methodology for Cost Adjustments and Surrogate Profit Selection in Antidumping Review
In Dongkuk S&C Co., Ltd. v. United States, No. 23-1419 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 21, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. Department of Commerce’s determinations in its antidumping investigation of utility-scale wind towers from South Korea. The decision clarifies Commerce’s discretion in adjusting reported production costs and selecting surrogate data when calculating constructed value under…
-
Target Corporation v. United States: Federal Circuit Reaffirms Strict Finality in Customs Liquidation Errors
In Target Corp. v. United States, No. 2023-2274 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 21, 2025), the Federal Circuit reversed the Court of International Trade’s (CIT) dismissal of Target’s challenge to the reliquidation of antidumping entries, holding that the CIT improperly bypassed the statutory finality rules governing Customs’ liquidations. This decision reaffirms the holding in Cemex, S.A. v.…
-
Recentive v. Fox: Generic Machine Learning in a New Field Is Not Patent Eligible
In Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., No. 23-2437 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 18, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a patent infringement suit on § 101 grounds, holding that Recentive’s asserted patents were directed to ineligible subject matter. The court concluded that the patents merely applied well-known machine learning techniques to the new…
-
Sage Products, LLC v. Stewart: “Sterile” Label in UK Document Found to Anticipate U.S. “Sterilized” Patent Claims
In Sage Products, LLC v. Stewart, No. 2023-1603 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 15, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) finding that all challenged claims of Sage’s U.S. Patent Nos. 10,398,642 and 10,688,067 were unpatentable due to anticipation and obviousness. The ruling centered on whether a UK public assessment report (PAR)…
-
Heritage Alliance v. American Policy Roundtable: Descriptive Marks Without Acquired Distinctiveness Can’t Block Later Applications
In Heritage Alliance v. American Policy Roundtable, No. 24-1155 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 9, 2025), the Federal Circuit affirmed the TTAB’s refusal to block registration of “iVoters” and “iVoters.com” despite evidence of earlier use of “iVoterGuide” and “iVoterGuide.com” by the challenger. The court agreed with the Board that Heritage’s marks were highly descriptive and had not…