Banner Witcoff

BREXIT’S EFFECT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY By Bradley J. Van Pelt The United Kingdom’s vote to leave the European Union (EU) (Brexit) will undoubtedly impact intellectual property rights in Europe. Currently, the referendum is not legally binding and has no legal force until Parliament votes to repeal the 1972 European Communities Act. Only then can the…

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has implemented a Post-Prosecution Pilot (P3) Program, which combines effective features from the Pre-Appeal and After-final Consideration Pilot (AFCP 2.0) programs and adds new features. The P3 program provides for (i) an after final response to be considered by a panel of examiners (Pre-Appeal), (ii) an after final response to include…

FULL FEDERAL CIRCUIT AFFIRMS DISTRICT COURT ON INAPPLICABILITY OF ON-SALE BAR TO MEDCO’S TRANSACTIONS By Ernest V. Linek On July 11, 2016, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a unanimous en banc decision in favor of The Medicines Company (MedCo), holding that use of a contract manufacturer’s services does not constitute an…

Banner & Witcoff welcomes patent agent Xin Li and law clerk Reilley Keane to its Washington, D.C., office. Ms. Li brings eight years of patent prosecution experience to the firm. She has a M.S. in electrical engineering from Wayne State University, M.S. of engineering, microelectronics and solid state electronics from the Chinese Academy of Sciences,…

Darrell G. Mottley, the chairman of the D.C. Bar Global Legal Practice Task Force, discusses the importance of new recommendations that were released in May as part of the Task Force’s interim report in an article on the D.C. Bar’s website. These recommendations outline a series of short-term and long-term proposals that seek to expand…

PATENT OFFICE’S CONTINUATION FILING DEADLINE RULE UPHELD BY THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT By Ernest V. Linek Yesterday, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded the decision of the Delaware district court in Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp., No. 1:12-cv-00259, 2015 WL 627425 (D. Del. Feb. 11, 2015). That case held that to…

U.S. SUPREME COURT DECIDES CUOZZO SPEED V. LEE By Robert H. Resis Today the U.S. Supreme Court decided Cuozzo Speed v. Lee, Inc., No. 15-446. The Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s judgment in full, thus resolving two significant issues for inter partes review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) under the America…

Rajit Kapur weighs in on the Supreme Court’s decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. in Law360. Please click here to read the article, “Attys React to High Court’s Copyright Attys’ Fee Ruling.” Subscription is required.

U.S. SUPREME COURT RULES IN KIRTSAENG V. JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC. By Rajit Kapur Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., No. 15-375, that it is appropriate for a court to give substantial weight to the reasonableness of a losing party’s position when deciding whether to award attorney’s…

Ernest V. Linek discusses the Supreme Court’s ruling in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. in Intellectual Property Magazine. Please click here to read the article, “SCOTUS clarifies standard for awarding attorneys’ fees in Kirtsaeng.” Subscription is required.