article thumbnail

New TTAB Precedent Prohibits Incorporation By Reference

JD Supra Law

In a precedential decision issued June 6, 2025, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) confirmed what has long been suggested in its procedural manual: Appellants in ex parte appeals may not incorporate arguments from prior prosecution by reference in their briefs.

article thumbnail

[Guest post] EUIPO Second Board of Appeal refers case to Grand Board of Appeal following earlier refusal to register a photograph of a man’s head/face as an EU trade mark

The IPKat

With this context in mind, it is no wonder that the EUIPO Second Board of Appeal, in Case R 50/2024-2 , concerning the earlier refusal to register the portrait of a Dutch entertainer as an EU trade mark (EUTM), decided to stay the proceedings and refer the matter to the Grand Board.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Architect Sues Pinterest Over Scraping

Plagiarism Today

Although the lawsuit mentions the removal of other metadata, it is unclear what metadata they are referring to. Neither the claim nor the exhibit references EXIF or similar metadata. In fact, one of Concept’s exhibits references the page on which it appears. The second point, however, is probably the weakest.

article thumbnail

Precedential No. 5: TTAB Will Not Accept Incorporation-By-Reference of An Appellant's Prosecution Arguments

The TTABlog

The Board was more concerned about applicant's arguments on appeal, or lack thereof, and particularly with applicant's attempt to incorporate its prosecution arguments by reference. In re Princeton Equity Group LLC , Serial No. 97397212 (June 6, 2025) [not precedential] (Opinion by Judge Thomas L. Casagrande).

article thumbnail

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Enabling Anticipatory Prior Art Reference Need Only Enable a Single Embodiment of the Claim

JD Supra Law

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - ALNYLAM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC. MODERNA, INC. OPINION] (2023-2357, 06/04/2025) (Taranto, Chen, Hughes) - Taranto, J. The Court affirmed the district court’s claim construction ruling, which formed the basis for the parties’ stipulated judgment of non-infringement. By: WilmerHale

Art 65
article thumbnail

Reference Recycling and the Case for Sua Sponte Rehearing in Ingenico

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch This is a follow-up on my recent discussion of Ingenico v. IOENGINE , a potentially groundbreaking decision that appears to have unintentionally upended fundamental principles of IPR estoppel.

article thumbnail

EBA decides G1/24 on claim interpretation: The description should always be consulted

The IPKat

The referral arose from diverging Board of Appeal case law on whether the description and drawings should always be used to interpret the claims, or should only be referred to when the claims are

Patent 108