The Federal Circuit Applies Nautilus The Federal Circuit addressed the new test for indefiniteness in Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL. 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 17459 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 10, 2014).

Patent Indefiniteness After 'Nautilus' Ognian V. Shentov of Jones Day provides background and reports on some recent developments to help navigate the changing landscape in the law on indefiniteness.

The Federal Circuit reversed in a 2-1 decision. The majority held that the district court’s analysis involving “unanswered questions” applied an incorrect standard for indefiniteness.

Indefiniteness is a particular risk for software patents when a claim identifies a software module that performs a particular function without indicating how the function is performed.

Over a year ago, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments, 134 S. Ct. 2120 (2014), replacing the Federal Circuit's “insolubly ambiguous” standard with a “reasonable ...

The court noted its “decision here is limited to IPXL -type indefiniteness and does not affect claims that are indefinite for other reasons,” and “does not affect the disposition of cases in ...

According to Judge Taranto, when the issue of indefiniteness of claims is raised in an IPR the challenge is not merely a contest between the petitioner and the patent owner, but rather protects ...

Terms of degree, while posing a risk of indefiniteness, are not inherently indefinite: “Claim language employing terms of degree has long been found definite where it provided enough certainty ...

The indefiniteness standard has, until recently, been very high—only an “insolubly ambiguous claim” was considered indefinite (see, e.g., Honeywell Intern., Inc. v. International Trade, 341 ...

More information: Yu Guo et al, Experimental Demonstration of Input-Output Indefiniteness in a Single Quantum Device, Physical Review Letters (2024). DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.160201 ...

She also noted a bevy of legal minutiae regarding how patents are to be filed and how they are deemed valid when denying indefiniteness claims against Apple's U.S. Patent No. D618,677, No. D593 ...

1996—In a muddled speech on the “majesty of the law” at Suffolk University law school, then-district judge Sonia Sotomayor complains that “the public fails to appreciate the importance of ...