Skip To Main Content
Elizabeth Weiskopf on Muck Rack

Elizabeth Weiskopf

Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work. Claim your profile
Back to Elizabeth Weiskopf’s profile

Articles by Elizabeth Weiskopf

USPTO Announces Final Rule Changing Claim Construction Standard in Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review and Covered Business Method Patent Proceedings - Lexology

|
By Jason A. Engel, Elizabeth Weiskopf
| Lexology Verified
The United States Patent and Trademark Office is publishing a final rule revising the claim construction standard used by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) in inter partes review, post-grant review, and covered business method patent review proceedings. The Board will no longer interpret claims under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard and will instead use the claim construction standard enunciated in Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

Where Can Hatch-Waxman and BPCIA Cases Stick After TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC?

|
By Peter Giunta, Kenneth C. Liao, Elizabeth Weiskopf
| JD Supra
Hatch-Waxman[1] litigators are accustomed to cases with multiple generic drug company defendants. Brand drug company plaintiffs often sue multiple defendants in the same district court, even when those defendants are not incorporated in the district and have no facilities there. Until now, as long as the court had personal jurisdiction over a defendant, there was little that defendant could do to get out of that court.[2]  With the Supreme Court’s decision in TC Heartland LLC v.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

The PTAB Can Offer A Second Chance At Obviousness-Even After The Federal Circuit Affirms The Non-Obviousness of the Patent Claims

|
By Jackson Ho, Elizabeth Weiskopf
| JD Supra
On April 4, 2017, in Novartis AG v. Noven Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,[1] the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB’s”) holding that various claims of U.S. Patents 6,316,023 and 6,335,031 (“the Patents at Issue”) were obvious over the prior art despite prior judicial opinions to the contrary. In affirming the PTAB, the Federal Circuit held that prior district court decisions were not binding on the PTAB even when affirmed by the Federal Circuit.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?
Show More