Taylor Swift has long been a household name, but in recent years she has become a commercial powerhouse. It is this commercial power that landed her in hot water with the release of her album ‘The Life of a Showgirl’.
Read MoreFor applicants with a patent application having, or amended to have, a streamlined claim set—one independent claim and a maximum of nine singly dependent claims—the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently launched a new mechanism for accelerating initial review of the application. This Program (the Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Program) is separate from the USPTO’s existing procedures to advance out of turn (accord special status) the examination of a utility application, which includes (1) a petition to make special, or (2) a request for prioritized examination.
Read MoreThe Federal Circuit recently issued its first review of a derivation proceeding, a rarely used proceeding provided for by the America Invents Act (AIA).
Read MoreOn 25 July 2025, K&L Gates secured an important win for its client, Midas Green Technologies, LLC. Acting USPTO Director Coke Morgan Stewart granted Director review and denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition filed by Midas Green’s competitor, Green Revolution Cooling, Inc., which had sought to invalidate U.S. Patent No. 10,405,457—currently being asserted by Midas Green in a parallel lawsuit pending in the Western District of Texas. The patent describes a modular immersion cooling system that circulates dielectric fluid to cool vertically mounted electronic appliances, such as computer servers, in a tank.
Read MoreEarlier this year, Chief Judge Boalick issued guidance on the USPTO’s recission of “Interim Procedure for Discretionary Denials in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings with Parallel District Court Litigation,” explaining how the Fintiv factors should be addressed going forward. Shortly after, Acting Director Stewart issued a memorandum titled “Interim Processes for PTAB Workload Management” that provided additional non-Fintiv discretionary factors that should be assessed to determine whether discretionary denial of an IPR petition is appropriate.
Read MoreThe Federal Circuit recently resolved a split among the district courts whether patent infringement defendants who bring inter partes review (IPR) challenges are estopped from raising new prior art challenges in a co-pending district court litigation. While some district courts had earlier found estoppel to have broad effect, and thus prevent challenges based on products on sale or public use, the Federal Circuit’s decision means that estoppel is limited only to challenges based on patents or printed publications, opening the door to use patents and publications to provide evidence of what subject matter was “on sale” or “in public use.”
Read MoreOn 19 January 2025 the USPTO enacted a new Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) size fee. A new IDS size fee, codified under 37 C.F.R. 1.17(v), is accrued for any pending application when the number of cumulative references cited by the applicant exceeds each of 50, 100, and 200 references (hereinafter, “IDS Size Fee”).
Read MoreOn 20 March 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated as “Informative” the majority opinion in the Decision Denying Institution in IPR2024-00952, a decision originally entered on December 13, 2024.
Read MoreIn the recent decision of Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected the long-standing approach concerning the interpretation of the domestic-industry requirement under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The complainant, an American company importing eyelash extensions from international manufacturers, which alleged that certain other importers were infringing on its patents.
Read MoreThe United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced increased patent and trademark fees effective 19 and 18 January 2025, respectively.
Read MoreCopyright © 2026, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.