Fed Circ contests PTAB over single or plural meaning in microfluidic device patent
Judges partially overturn decision that ABS had failed to prove claims in Cytonome patent were invalid | PTAB and appeals court differ in interpretation of whether claims language had single or plural meaning.
If you don't have a login or your access has expired, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content.
For more information on individual annual subscriptions for full paid access and corporate subscription options please contact us.
To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk
17 August 2023 A recent precedential case highlights the thorny issue of what constitutes a fair response to new claim constructions following an institution, says Blair Jacobs of McKool Smith.
11 July 2023 Precedential decision marks blow for medical device maker after earlier win | PTAB criticised for “fundamental legal error” and “narrow definition”.