Dennis Crouch - Patently-O

Dennis Crouch - Patently-O

@denniscrouch.bsky.social

Law Prof @MizzouLaw | Founder of Patently-O | #artificialintelligence #patents #SCOTUS | Teaching legal ethics | #coldplunge enthusiast & proud girl dad x2 🧊📚⚖️

1.2K followers1.8K following436 posts

Throwback to ProFoot v. Merck: A classic case on functional claim language and structural limitations from the specification. See how courts narrow claims even when drafted functionally. A must-read from Patently-O's archives.

patentlyo.comAlthough Functionally Claimed, Court Imports Structural Limitations from Specificationby Dennis Crouch - Note, the prevailing party here (Merck & Co.) is represented in this case by MBHB Partner Dan …

Throwback to a landmark Federal Circuit decision: Apple v. Samsung (2016) on why extra-record claim construction evidence is improper on appeal. A classic Patently-O post exploring the boundaries of appellate review in patent cases.

patentlyo.comIt is Improper to Consider Extra-Record Claim Construction Evidence On Appeal Apple v. Samsung (Fed. Cir. 2016) (En banc) Note: This SamsApple case is not the design patent damages case now before the US …

New on Patently-O: An empirical breakdown of Rule 132 declarations filed in §101 cases. Out of 6,111 declarations since December, only 460 addressed eligibility - and examiners rejected them 66% of the time. Outside experts fared worst. See what the data reveals.

patentlyo.comSubject Matter Eligibility Declarations: An Empirical Study of Rule 132 Evidence and Examiner ResponseStudy of 460 Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations (SMEDs) filed at the USPTO since December 2025: most examiners kept the § 101 rejection.

Exciting news for law students interested in patent litigation! The USPTO and IU Maurer are launching a PTAB Law School Moot Court Competition this Spring 2027. Compete before actual APJ panels with an in-person final in Alexandria. Learn more on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comPTAB Law School Moot Court Competition Set for Spring 2027USPTO and IU Maurer announce a Spring 2027 PTAB Law School Moot Court Competition: one brief, APJ panels, and an in-person final in Alexandria.

After Williamson, means-plus-function claims plummeted to just 3% of patents. But functional claiming didn't disappear - it surged to 74%. Patently-O investigates what changed and where function went in new data covering 8.75 million patents.

patentlyo.comAfter Williamson: Who Changed Their Claims, and Where the Function WentNew data on 8.75 million patents: means-plus-function claims are down to 3%, but functional claiming hit 74%. Who changed, and what replaced it?

Chief Judge Moore had sharp words for J&M's counsel at oral argument, yet the panel may be leaning toward reversal on the "askewed angle" claim. Read the latest analysis on Patently-O about this surprising turn in J&M v. Kinze.

patentlyo.comOut of Line: Chief Judge Moore Rebukes Counsel, Then Leans Toward Reversal in J&M v. KinzeChief Judge Moore rebukes J&M's counsel for touting credentials at Markman, yet the panel signals that "askewed angle" is broad, not indefinite.

Federal Circuit grants mandamus in In re Google, moving USC v. Google from Judge Albright's Austin docket to N.D. Cal. - a significant development weeks after the judge's departure. Read the latest from Patently-O.

patentlyo.comParting Shot: Mandamus Sends USC v. Google from Judge Albright's Austin Docket to N.D. Cal.Federal Circuit grants mandamus in In re Google, moving USC v. Google from Austin to N.D. Cal. weeks after Judge Albright left the bench.

Third Circuit rules against Thomson Reuters in ROSS case: intermediate copying requires necessity, and fair use doesn't apply. The court leaves generative AI questions for another day. Read the latest analysis on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comEase Is Not Necessity: Third Circuit Affirms No Fair Use in Thomson Reuters v. ROSSThird Circuit affirms no fair use in Thomson Reuters v. ROSS: intermediate copying requires necessity, and generative AI is left for another case.

New on Patently-O: The Federal Circuit's latest ruling in Satius v. Samsung sidesteps indefiniteness to invalidate claims under enablement standards. When an alternative is physically impossible, is the claim still definite? The court says yes - but it still fails. Read the analysis.

patentlyo.comClear but Impossible: Satius v. Samsung Moves Inoperable Claims from Indefiniteness to EnablementSatius v. Samsung: a claim reciting an impossible alternative is definite, but the Federal Circuit holds it invalid for lack of enablement under Amgen.

Federal Circuit denies en banc review in Teva v. Lilly, leaving method claims to an antibody genus intact post-Amgen. Judge Dyk's dissent raises important questions about claim scope. Read the analysis on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comMethod or Molecule: Judge Dyk Dissents from En Banc Denial in Teva v. LillyFederal Circuit denies en banc review in Teva v. Lilly over Judge Dyk's dissent, leaving method claims to an antibody genus intact after Amgen.

Crocs is asking the Supreme Court a tricky question: can one ITC determination start two different appeal clocks? The Federal Circuit said no - and dismissed Crocs' appeal as late. Read the latest from Patently-O on this procedural puzzle.

patentlyo.comOne Determination, Two Clocks: Crocs Asks the Supreme Court to Fix ITC Appeal DeadlinesCrocs asks the Supreme Court whether one ITC determination can start two appeal clocks after the Federal Circuit dismissed its appeal as late.

New on Patently-O: Guest post by Paul R. Gugliuzza examining the Federal Circuit's latest jurisdictional expansion in Insulet v. EOFlow and how it sidesteps the Mottley well-pleaded complaint rule. A must-read for patent practitioners.

patentlyo.comThe Federal Circuit Expands Its Jurisdiction Yet AgainGuest post by Paul R. Gugliuzza: the Federal Circuit's jurisdictional holding in Insulet v. EOFlow ignores Mottley's well-pleaded complaint rule.

A Federal Circuit dismissal hinges on a missing judgment entry. In Heidary v. Amazon, the court found an appeal six months late - except a proper Rule 58 judgment was never entered, making it only 24 days late. Read the latest on Patently-O.

patentlyo.com24 Days Late, Not Six Months: The Missing Judgment in Heidary v. AmazonFederal Circuit dismisses pro se patent appeal as six months late, but with no separate Rule 58 judgment the notice was only 24 days late.

The Supreme Court's patent docket is heating up. With 13 petitions and counting, major battles loom over IPR review, patent eligibility, damages, and claim scope. Read the latest analysis on Patently-O to see what's next.

patentlyo.comPatent Docket Heading into the Supreme Court’s Long ConferenceSupreme Court patent docket swells with 13 petitions, two more pending, and major fights over IPR review, eligibility, damages, and claim scope.

Fortress Iron seeks Supreme Court review after losing two patents due to a missing coinventor. Interestingly, an 1868 case reached the opposite conclusion. Read about "The Missing Inventor Problem" on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comMissing, Then Found: Fortress Iron's Cert Petition and the Unlocatable CoinventorFortress Iron seeks Supreme Court review after losing two patents over a coinventor who could not be found. An 1868 case went the other way.

The Federal Circuit extends Sanho to the grace period under 102(b)(1)(B). A private sale doesn't count as public disclosure, so a rival's later sale can still be prior art. Read the analysis on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comThe Federal Circuit Extends Sanho to the Section 102(b)(1)(B) Grace PeriodFederal Circuit extends Sanho to 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(1)(B): NCS Multistage's private AirLock sale was no public disclosure, so a rival's sale is prior art.

A classic from the Patently-O archives: The Federal Circuit weighs in on case management tactics. Can courts force plaintiffs to drop patents from litigation? Revisit this important decision in patent strategy and discovery management.

patentlyo.comFederal Circuit Approves of Order to Drop Patents from the Lawsuit to Facilitate Case Managementby Dennis Crouch In re Midwest Athletics and Sports Alliance LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021) MASA sued Xerox for infringing 20 …

Apple challenges the Supreme Court on a critical ITC question: does R&D count as domestic labor or capital under the domestic industry test? Patently-O explores this issue plus the ITC's tariff-era roots.

patentlyo.comLabor or Capital: Apple Asks the Supreme Court to Narrow the ITC's Domestic Industry TestApple asks the Supreme Court whether R&D counts as labor or capital under the ITC's domestic industry test, plus the ITC's tariff-era origins.

Federal Circuit clarifies Rule 19 boundaries in TexasLDPC v. Broadcom: sovereign immunity doesn't make a licensor a required party to its licensee's patent suit. Key win for patent litigation strategy. Read the full analysis on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comShield and Sword: Sovereign Immunity, Discovery, and Rule 19 After TexasLDPC v. BroadcomFederal Circuit reverses in TexasLDPC v. Broadcom: Rule 19 is not a discovery tool, and Texas A&M is not a required party to its licensee's suit.

Rare Breed's forced-reset trigger faces Federal Circuit scrutiny. We examine how a DOJ settlement sparked a sprawling 95-case MDL and whether the lower court's O2 Micro misstep will derail enforcement. New post on Patently-O.

patentlyo.comSubstantially In Battery: Rare Breed's Trigger Patent Campaign Reaches the Federal CircuitRare Breed's trigger appeal at the Federal Circuit: why the O2 Micro misstep below may not matter, and how a DOJ deal fueled a 95-case patent MDL.

New on Patently-O: Can a contract cap trade secret damages at a royalty rate? Versata v. Ford shows trade secret law differs from patent law - and courts are split on whether license agreements can limit recovery of a taker's gains.

patentlyo.comTake or License: Can a Contract Cap Trade Secret Damages at a Royalty?Versata v. Ford: trade secret law reaches a taker's gains, unlike patent law. Can a license cap that recovery at a royalty? Courts are split.