Many experienced practitioners have come to realize that a fair amount of wordsmithing is required to ensure that an invention is not unduly limited.?á The Federal Circuit has consistently taken the approach that the intrinsic evidence contained within the patent is most highly regarded during claim construction, to the point where inventor statements characterizing the invention may be irrelevant.?á In Continental Circuits LLC v. Intel Corp., (Appeal Number 2018-1076, Fed. Cir. February 8, 2019) (?Ç£Continental Circuits?Ç¥), the Federal Circuit looked at a limitation that was read into the claims by the District Court and found that the exacting requirements to infer a claim limitation had not been met. Continental Circuits LLC (?Ç£Continental?Ç¥) owned four patents directed to a ?Ç£multilayer electrical device… having a tooth structure.?Ç¥ ?áContinental Circuits at 2.?á The four patents at issue, U.S. Patent No. 7,501,582 (?Ç£the ?Çÿ582 patent?Ç¥), U.S. Patent No. 8,278,560 (?Ç£the ?Çÿ560 patent?Ç¥), U.S. Patent… Continue Reading
When participants in qualified retirement plans are no longer current employees of the plan sponsor, it can be challenging to ensure that the contact information in the plan?ÇÖs records is up to date and accurate. However, inaccurate contact information in the plan?ÇÖs records is problematic for a variety of reasons, including causing operational failures when participants do not receive distribution of benefits by the plan?ÇÖs required distribution date and increasing the possibility of fraud when a participant?ÇÖs information is sent to the wrong address. Plan administrators should review their procedures for locating missing participants and ensure that they are (1) consistent with available guidance from the IRS and the DOL, (2) appropriate for the plan and its participant population, and (3) being followed consistently by the plan administrator or its delegate. Plan administrators should also document any steps undertaken to locate missing participants. The plan?ÇÖs procedures should also address how… Continue Reading
An employer should be cautious to not ?Ç£endorse?Ç¥ a voluntary benefits program that the employer wants to be exempt from ERISA. The DOL?ÇÖs safe harbor exempting certain plans from ERISA (often called ?Ç£voluntary plans?Ç¥) requires the sole function of the employer to be, without endorsing the program, to permit the insurer to publicize the program to employees and to collect premiums and remit them to the insurer. Federal courts have found impermissible endorsements where employers either encouraged their employees to participate in their voluntary benefits program or selected the insurer and limited eligibility criteria. For example, in October 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit decided a case involving whether the employer?ÇÖs endorsement of a volunteer disability benefits program caused it to be subject to ERISA. The Court found that (i) a reasonable employee would not view the program as being merely a third-party offering and (ii)… Continue Reading
Patent Term Adjustment deductions for applicant delay are only appropriate when the Applicant could have taken steps to advance prosecution but failed to do so
In Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 2017-1357 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 23, 2019), the Federal Circuit rejected the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office?ÇÖs practice of deducting time from the patent term adjustment (PTA) for applicant delays during periods of time when the applicants had no reasonable steps to take to advance prosecution.?á Slip op. at 19. The PTA statute provides that PTA will be reduced by the period of time during which the applicant failed to engage in reasonable efforts to conclude prosecution of the application.?á 35 U.S.C. ?º?á154(b).?á The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) promulgated regulations relating to PTA, including 37 C.F.R. ?º 1.704(c)(8), which states Submission of a supplemental reply or other paper, other than a supplemental reply or other paper expressly requested by the examiner, after a reply has been filed, in which case the period of adjustment set forth in ?º 1.703 [that extends the… Continue Reading
In conducting due diligence in connection with a corporate transaction, it is common for buyers to request copies of the target?ÇÖs current contracts with its benefit plan service providers like the recordkeeper and third party administrator. Buyers should also consider obtaining information regarding how long the target has been using their current service provider. If there has been a change in service providers in the prior several years, buyers should also consider requesting copies of contracts with the target?ÇÖs previous service providers. This is true especially if there is a concern that there might be operational errors that would require correction, since information will likely have to be obtained from the plan?ÇÖs prior service providers.
The Puerto Rico Department of the Treasury recently issued Circular Letter Internal Revenue No. 18-21 (the ?Ç£Circular?Ç¥), which announced applicable qualified retirement plan limits for 2019, as required by the Puerto Rico Internal Revenue Code of 2011, as amended (the ?Ç£PR Code?Ç¥). For plans qualified only in Puerto Rico, the limits on elective deferrals, catch-up contributions, and after-tax contributions all remain unchanged for 2019, while the limits on annual benefits, annual contributions, plan compensation, and the highly compensated employee threshold all increased for 2019. For plans qualified in both Puerto Rico and the U.S. (including the Federal Government Thrift Plan), the limits on catch-up and after-tax contributions remain unchanged for 2019, while the limits on elective deferrals, annual benefits, annual contributions, plan compensation, and the highly-compensated employee threshold, all increased for 2019. The applicable plan limits are as follows: Annual Benefit Limit (All Defined Benefit Plans): $225,000 (increased from $220,000)… Continue Reading
In 2017, the PBGC introduced a program that offered voluntary mediation with certain termination liability collection and Early Warning Program cases. The program was made permanent and was expanded to include fiduciary breach cases in 2019. Mediation is offered to eligible plan sponsors either with the demand letter (for fiduciary breach cases) or at the outset of mediation (for Early Warning Program cases) or after review of the information disclosed to the PBGC under 29 C.F.R. ?º 4062.6 (for termination liability cases). View the PBGC Mediation Program.