IP Litigation Insider—April 2018

April 17, 2018 | Newsletters



The Facts in the “Abstract”

By Matt Acosta

“We demand rigidly defined areas of doubt and uncertainty!”
-Douglas Adams, Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy

It seems that Douglas Adams has a great many fans in the universe of IP law. While he almost certainly didn’t have patent issues in mind while penning his cult classic, he was nevertheless prophetic of our current situation.

In 2014, the Supreme Court issued its landmark Alice decision, which had the effect of significantly raising the bar for “patent eligibility.”   The opinion has had a particularly adverse effect on so-called “software” enabled patents; the buzz being that the very concept of “software” patents is now dead.  As a general proposition, that statement is simply wrong. However, it is true that many software patents—primarily those issued before the days of Alice—are now being invalidated for claiming only “abstract” ideas.

Absolute Intervening Rights: Maximizing the Impact of Post-Grant Challenges

By Blake Dietrich

When faced with allegations of patent infringement, many defendants elect to challenge the validity of asserted patents using the various post-grant proceedings available with the United States Patent & Trademark Office (“PTO”). In particular, these post-grant proceedings include at least inter partes reviews, post-grant reviews, covered business method challenges and ex parte reexaminations.

The 10 Attorney Types at IP Conferences

By John M. Jackson

Having worked the intellectual property conference circuit for more than 12 years, I am frequently reminded of the apt Bon Jovi lyrics:  “It’s all the same. Only the names are changed.” 

Indeed, over the years I have been fascinated by the consistency of attendance at IP conferences, with the same characters showing up year after year.  While the names of these attorneys change from event to event and year to year, the ten species below are remarkably predictable. Do any of these sound familiar?