Maria Santos

Correspondent

Maria Santos

White House correspondent, covers patent, trade and regulatory news

Business & Regulatory patent

Decisions covered by Maria Santos

1,023 decisions
Mar 9 2026
3rd Cir. 25-1689 Panel Decision

MARK R. CUKER; GERALD J. WILLIAMS v. ESTHER E. BEREZOFSKY

The Third Circuit affirmed a district court order confirming an arbitration award resolving a law firm dissolution dispute. The court rejected the appellant's claims that the arbitrators manifestly disregarded the law or committed misconduct regarding fee distributions and jurisdictional limits.

Mar 9 2026
Fed. Cir. 24-2122 Panel Decision

DSS, Inc. v. Nichia Corporation

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court judgment finding patent claims invalid. The court held that the asserted claims were indefinite under Section thirty-five of the United States Code, Section one hundred twelve.

Mar 9 2026
Fed. Cir. 20-1173, 20-1174 Panel Decision

IMPLICIT, LLC v. SONOS, INC., JOHN A. SQUIRES, UNDER SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR OF THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's decision that certificates of correction issued after final written decisions in inter partes review proceedings do not retroactively invalidate those decisions. The court held that the patent owner forfeited the right to rely on the corrected inventorship because it failed to raise the argument in a timely manner during the initial proceedings.

Mar 9 2026
4th Cir. 25-1454 Panel Decision

CIN DALE 3; JOHN WRIGHT, 1&2; MILLER; BAK; BALL, 1&2; HUGH D. DALE, JR v. PEOPLES BANK CORP.; KIM LIGHTHALL; JOHN OR JANE DOE BANK EMPLOYEES 1-5

The Fourth Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a suit against a bank for seizing funds to satisfy a Texas judgment, holding that banks perform a ministerial function when complying with court enforcement writs. The court ruled that the bank acted with legal right under West Virginia law and that the judgment debtors must challenge the underlying judgment rather than sue the bank.