Search
Search | Sitemap Contact Sign Up

En Banc Petitions

Search By
Status
Subject
375 Petitions
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Question(s) Presented
Appeal No.
22-1058
Case
Roku, Inc. v. Universal Electronics, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether this Court may terminate its review of a lower tribunal’s obviousness analysis upon determining only that certain factual findings undergirding the analysis are supported by substantial evidence (as the...
Appeal No.
22-1027, 22-1028
Case
CareDx, Inc. v. Natera, Inc.
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether an improvement on a human-made method is patent eligible at Alice step one, when the claimed advance is also human-made?” “Whether an improvement upon a human-made method is patent eligible...
Appeal No.
22-1016
Case
Click-to-Call Technologies, LP v. Ingenio, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)’s IPR estoppel provision applies only to claims addressed in the final written decision, as consistent with the holdings in Shaw, and Intuitive Surgical, and whether...
Appeal No.
21-2369
Case
Nippon Shinyaku Co. v. Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Does the Erie doctrine require this Court to apply state substantive law when deciding an issue of contract interpretation under state law, including a state contract law principle that there...
Appeal No.
21-2356, 21-2358, 21-2361, 21-2363, 21-2365
Case
Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Innovations S.A.R.L.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Where an invention’s intended purpose is to provide an ‘improvement’ or ‘increase’ in benefits over prior designs, whether the patentee can demonstrate the invention works for that purpose without...
Appeal No.
21-2349
Case
Infernal Technology, LLC v. Activision Blizzard Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“An open-ended claim term, such one using the term ‘at least,’ includes, but is not limited to, one or more of the specified items of data, and may or may...
Appeal No.
21-2320, 21-2376
Case
Salazar v. AT&T Mobility LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Court should expand what has been an extremely limited exception to the well-established general rule of claim construction, that indefinite articles ‘a’ or ‘an’ mean ‘one or...
Appeal No.
21-2299, 21-2338
Case
Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Did the panel err in limiting comparison prior art used for design patent infringement analysis by (1) permitting consideration of functional and (2) importing the anticipation standard?”
Appeal No.
21-2296, 21-2297, 22-1070
Case
Ironburg Inventions Ltd. v. Valve Corporation
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether this Court may presume a district court considered and rejected issues and evidence presented, where the district court failed to address them and failed to provide sufficient detail...
Appeal No.
21-2275
Case
Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Apple Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“May a court declare a patent unenforceable under the doctrine of prosecution laches based on actions an applicant took in compliance with an examination agreement reached with the PTO?” “Must prosecution...
Appeal No.
21-2137
Case
Low Temp Industries, Inc. v. Duke Manufacturing Co.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a district court’s grant of preliminary injunction can be properly reversed under an abuse of discretion standard because the claims appear ‘vulnerable’ to a validity challenge even though the...
Appeal No.
21-2121
Case
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Whether the “panel in this case [correctly] concluded that a prior-art reference could not anticipate or disclose an invention formed from two elements contained in defined lists that the art...
Appeal No.
21-2111
Case
Innovation Sciences, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether it is proper to treat a system built in 2019 for purposes of the litigation that included certain prior art components (i.e., the 2019 HAL System) as an...
Appeal No.
21-2093
Case
Finjan LLC v. ESET, LLC
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a District Court’s construction of a claim term in an asserted patent, determined to be consistent with a totality of the evidence based on analysis of conflicting definitions provided...
Appeal No.
21-2040
Case
VDPP LLC v. VIZIO, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “The en banc portion of Williamson held, in part, that ‘[w]hen a claim term lacks the word “means,” the presumption’ against means-plus-function treatment ‘can be overcome and § 112, para....
Appeal No.
21-1963, 21-1987
Case
Evolusion Concepts, Inc. v. Hoc Events, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“When a patentee says that ‘the invention is’ something—a phrase that appears in countless patents—is the interested public entitled to rely on that statement when determining the scope of the...
Appeal No.
21-1937, 21-1984
Case
Vocalife LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
Whether “the Opinion contradicts the district court’s claim construction, which stands as a matter of law in absence of any de novo review, of the ‘plurality of configurations’ limitation.” Whether “the...
Appeal No.
21-1903
Case
Nike, Inc. v. Adidas AG
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“In an inter partes review, does the petitioner bear the burden of persuasion for an unpatentability ground the Board raises sua sponte against proposed substitute claims?”
Appeal No.
21-1900, 21-1901, 21-1918
Case
VR Optics, LLC v. Peloton Interactive Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
“Whether a court may find a claim anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 based on a single reference, when there is no finding from the court that the reference discloses...
Appeal No.
21-1855
Case
CyWee Group Ltd. v. ZTE (USA), Inc.
Subject
Patent
Status
Denied
Question(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Panel erred in upholding joinder of a party under 35 U.S.C. 315(c), where the joined party did not ‘properly file a petition’ for inter partes review within...