A long-running patent dispute between Teleflex and Medtronic recently ended by settlement after a remand that was unusual even for seasoned patent litigators. Teleflex accused Medtronic’s Telescope guide-extension catheter of infringing a family of catheter patents. Medtronic prevailed in district court when the court held a repeated claim phrase,…
Publications
Irwin IP Publications is the go-to resource for the latest updates and insights in the world of intellectual property. Over 250 articles are published on cases addressing unique issues, all of which can be found using the search tool below. Additionally, there is a collection of articles/papers and presentations that cover a wide range of topics. Whether you’re a legal professional, business owner, or simply someone passionate about IP, our publications page will provide you with all the knowledge needed to navigate this dynamic field.
On March 17, 2026, the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York heldthat Sol de Janiero’s (“SDJ”) packaging for a beauty cream product was functional and therefore not entitled to trade dress protection under the Lanham Act. As a result, the court granted summary judgment…
The Third Circuit affirmed denial of an injunction to prevent a biosimilar manufacturer from launching a biosimilar version of the blockbuster drug, Stelara (ustekinumab), under a third-party’s private label. Although the district court found the movant likely to succeed on the merits of its contract-based claims, the Third Circuit…
The Constitution mandates that the U.S. patent system promote the progress of science and useful arts. Naming and crediting all inventors has long been central to that mandate. While the Patent Act allows correction of inventorship errors, patentees should not take that remedy for granted. In Fortress, the Federal Circuit held that failure to name all inventors renders a patent invalid if the…
After years of litigation, the Federal Circuit dismissed a patent infringement lawsuit because the plaintiff couldn’t prove it owned the patents at the time it filed the suit. The decision in AIT v. Salesforce emphasizes these lessons: AIT sued Salesforce for infringing two patents. AIT’s claim to those patents…
In Implicit v. Sonos, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s refusal to let Implicit use post-decision certificates of correction to introduce a new antedating theory in inter partes review. Implicit owned two related patents that originally named two individuals as the sole inventors. After Sonos filed IPRs to challenge…
In Exafer Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp., the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s exclusion of expert damages testimony and clarified the proper reach of its 2018 decision in Enplas Display Device Corp. v. Seoul Semiconductor Co. which was understood to stand for the proposition that unaccused or non-infringing activity…
Generally, someone may receive a patent for any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter. However, for over 75 years, courts have made a judicial exception to this rule prohibiting patents from covering natural phenomena. While it is well-known that patents cannot cover natural phenomena, courts often struggle to determine whether natural phenomena that have been modified are eligible for a patent. Last week, the…
This presentation, created by Robyn Bowland and Kyle Watson, will address how to think about intellectual property early in the business lifecycle, common IP missteps that can create operational or financial risk, how IP aligns with branding, contracts, and partnerships, and how to prioritize what to protect now versus…
In a recent decision that may surprise patent drafters and litigators alike, the Northern District of Illinois held that a patent claim using flexible, outcome-oriented language was not invalid for indefiniteness. In Xodus Medical Inc. et al. v. U.S. Surgitech, Inc., the court granted summary judgment in favor of…
On February 2, 2026, the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of non-infringement in Range of Motion Products, LLC v. Armaid Company Inc., holding that Armaid’s massage device did not infringe Range of Motion’s (RoM) design patent. The two devices use similar elements: curved arms, rollers, and a hinged base. …
A recent decision by United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) Director Squires may signal renewed interest in inter partes review (“IPR”) as a vehicle for challenging design patents. On January 12, 2026, the Director issued a decision in Top Glory Trading Group Inc. and DP Dream Pairs Inc….
On January 2, 2026, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict finding that tattoo artist Katherine Von Drachenberg (also known as Kat Von D) and her tattoo parlor, High Voltage Tattoo, did not infringe photographer Jeffrey Sedlik’s copyright in an iconic photograph of Miles Davis, holding that the tattoo and related sketches were not substantially similar and that Von Drachenberg’s social…
Be vigilant of how the public perceives your trademark, because if the primary significance of your mark has become the generic name of a good, you may lose your trademark. In Illinois Tamale Co., Inc. v. LC Trademarks, Inc, the Seventh Circuit reversed a district court order enjoining LC Trademarks, Inc. and Little Caesar Enterprises, Inc. (collectively…
The Fifth Circuit’s January 2026 decision in Vetter v. Resnik squarely addresses a fundamental question in copyright law: does termination recapture only U.S. rights, or does it restore the worldwide rights originally conveyed? In answering that question, the Court did more than simply side with “Double Shot (Of My…
Instead of decking the halls for Christmas, the Federal Circuit decked Longhorn by dismissing its appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Idaho, and over 30 other states, have taken patent law conduct into their own hands, enacting legislation to punish bad faith patent litigation. Recently, the Federal Circuit rejected a patentee’s appeal of denial of a motion to dismiss a counterclaim and imposition of a bond based on Idaho’s law because it did…
As a result of major changes over the past year at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), it is now materially harder to institute inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review (PGR). The following summarizes a tumultuous year at the PTAB and the USPTO. Bifurcating Institution and Elevating…
On December 10, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”)’s decision to cancel Game Plan, Inc. (“Game Plan”)’s registered trademark and dismiss its opposition to Uninterrupted IP, LLC (“UNIP”)’s pending applications. The dispute centered on whether a party can acquire priority over a registered mark…
Ex parte reexaminations and inter partes review (“IPR”) are two different procedures available at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) to invalidate a patent. In an ex parte reexamination, a third party can make a request for reexamination, but the third party will have no further involvement…
In another case addressing the use of copyrighted works by artificial intelligence technology (“AI”), the Southern District of New York denied a partial motion to dismiss a direct copyright infringement claim related to summaries generated by AI. The court held that the summaries could constitute copyright infringement and thus…