On July 7, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), in In re: Boloro Global Limited, granted a motion by Boloro Global Limited (Boloro) to vacate and remand the decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the Board) in three ex parte appeals that affirmed an examiner’s rejection of claims of Boloro’s patent applications. Each of Boloro’s U.S. Patent Applications Nos. 14/222,613, 14/222,615, and 14/222,616 were rejected by the patent examiner as being unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101. On appeal, the Board affirmed the examiner’s rejections and denied rehearing. In August 2019, Boloro appealed the decisions to the CAFC. Subsequently, in October 2019, the CAFC issued a decision in Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., which was an appeal from an inter partes review, holding that administrative patent judges (APJs) were not constitutionally appointed. In January 2020, Boloro filed a motion to vacate the Board’s decisions and remand for further proceedings consistent with the CAFC’s decision in Arthrex.
- Will SCOTUS Tell Bad Spaniels to Roll Over?
- DOJ Takes Key Step Toward Breaking Up Big Tech with Antitrust Complaint Against Google
- Federal Circuit Rejects St. Jude’s Challenge to Validity of Snyders’ Heart Valve Patent
- CAFC Affirms District Court Dismissal of Declaratory Judgment Under Doctrine of ‘Abstention’
- Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB Finding that Immunex Antibody Patent is Obvious
- American Innovators Express Support for Recent and Proposed Changes in Patent System
- This Week in Washington IP: Senate Commerce Committee to Grill Tech CEOs on Section 230, House Big Tech Antitrust Report and USPTO’s Quarterly TPAC Meeting
- Determining the Likelihood that an AI Patent Application Will Be Allowed at the USPTO
- Examining Samsung’s and LG’s LCD Patent Portfolios Following Decisions to Halt LCD Production
- Types of Subsequent Patent Applications in the United States (Part II)