Christina Jordan McCullough Partner

Since 1998, when the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in Cybor Corp. v. FAS Technologies, Inc., claim construction issues have been subject to de novo review on appeal. Under this standard of review, no formal deference is given to findings of the district court. Litigants dissatisfied with the district court’s claim construction have thus enjoyed, at least in theory, an entirely new opportunity to make their case on appeal.

Patent applicants who are dissatisfied with a rejection by the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences have two options for review. They can appeal directly to the Federal Circuit, which will review the Board’s decision on the record before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Alternatively, 35 U.S.C. § 145 provides that an applicant may “have remedy by civil action against the Director” of the Patent Office in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The primary issue in Kappos v. Hyatt was what limitations, if any, exist on an applicant’s right to submit new evidence that was not before the Patent Office in such a district court action.

CLE that looked at Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l.