WASHINGTON, D.C. — Less than two years after the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on the concrete injury requirement to establish standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution in a lawsuit over alleged violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA), the data aggregator defendant filed a renewed petition for certiorari Dec. 4, citing conflicting lower court interpretations of the prior ruling and a remand ruling by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that it says undermines the 2016 decision (Spokeo Inc. v. Thomas Robins, No. 17-806, U.S. Sup.).
NEW YORK — An insurer asked the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 5 to reverse a lower court’s finding that coverage for a firm's multimillion-dollar loss due to a fraudulent wire transfer scheme existed under the computer fraud provision of the company's executive protection insurance policy (Medidata Solutions Inc. v. Federal Insurance Co., No. 17-2492, 2nd Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that various challenged patent claims would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art were affirmed Nov. 30 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which found no error in the board’s differing construction of “internet protocol” and “Internet protocol” (AIP Acquisition LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc., No. 16-2371, Fed. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 24192).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although affirming a construction by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the claim term “request,” the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Dec. 1 nonetheless vacated in full the board’s determination that two patents are nonobvious and partly vacated the board’s holding that the patents are not anticipated by prior art (Microsoft Corp., et al., v. Parallel Networks Licensing LLC, Nos. 2016-2515, -2517, -2518, -2519, -2642, -2644, -2645, -2646, Fed. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 24333).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its Dec. 4 order list, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari to the operator of an adult website that had appealed a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that a usenet provider was not liable for direct or vicarious infringement of its copyrighted images due to a lack of volitional conduct (Perfect 10 Inc. v. Giganews Inc., et al, No. 17-320, U.S. Sup., 2017 U.S. LEXIS 7259).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Seeking review of a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruling that reversed a judgment ruling in its favor, a Texas tech firm tells the U.S. Supreme Court in a Nov. 9 petition for certiorari that a panel incorrectly applied the patent eligibility test of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l in deeming its patents abstract and not patent-eligible (Smartflash LLC, et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 17-697, U.S. Sup.).
BOSTON — Two organizations for visually impaired people and two blind individuals filed a class complaint on Nov. 20 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts accusing Hulu LLC, an online streaming company, of discrimination by failing to provide an audio description on any content and failing to make its website and software applications accessible to customers using screen readers (American Council of the Blind, et al. v. Hulu LLC, No. 17-12285, D. Mass.).
LAS VEGAS — A Nevada federal judge on Nov. 8 partially granted an emergency ex parte motion for temporary restraining order filed by a franchisor and ordered a former employee who is accused of seizing control of the franchisor’s domain name to halt using any domain name containing the franchisor’s name or similar variations of it and to not disclose any trade secrets (PROTEINHOUSE Franchising, LLC, et al. v. Ken B. Gutman, et al., No. 17-2816, D. Nev., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 185468).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Nov. 22 upheld the claim construction of various disputed terms proffered by a California federal judge in a win for Apple Inc. (Rembrandt Patent Innovations LLC, et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 16-2324, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Nov. 17 petition for inter partes review (IPR) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Microsoft Corp. challenged the patentability of seven claims of a patented remote control with an auto-zoom feature, which allows for easier button selection on a touch screen (Microsoft Corp. v. Koninklijke Philips N.V., No. IPR2018-00185, PTAB).
WILMINGTON, Del. — A Delaware federal magistrate judge on Nov. 20 recommended that allegations that WhatsApp Inc. infringed two electronic messaging patents should proceed, rejecting a request for dismissal on grounds of patent ineligibility (TriPlay Inc. v. WhatsApp Inc., No. 13-1703, D. Del., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 191330).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Opposing Google LLC’s petition for certiorari in a Nov. 9 brief, a mobile technology firm tells the U.S. Supreme Court that, per the America Invents Act (AIA), the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals has authority to review and reverse patent ineligibility determinations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) made during a covered business method (CBM) review (Google LLC v. Unwired Planet LLC., No. 17-357, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals mistakenly held that a usenet service provider did not profit from the millions of unauthorized copyrighted images on its fee-based websites, an adult website operator argues in a Nov. 8 reply brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking a writ of certiorari to resolve what it says is a circuit split over a copyright holder’s duty to establish an infringer’s profits directly attributable to its works (Perfect 10 Inc. v. Giganews Inc., et al, No. 17-320, U.S. Sup.).
SHERMAN, Texas — An information technology specialist can testify about whether statements made to investors by the CEO of a computer server development company were false, but cannot opine on whether the statements were misleading, a Texas federal judge ruled Nov. 14 (Securities and Exchange Commission v. William E. Mapp, III, No. 4:16-cv-00246, E.D. Texas, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 188083).
CHICAGO — In light of an announced confidential settlement between the parties in an Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) lawsuit, an Illinois federal judge on Oct. 30 dismissed a lawsuit against McDonald’s Corp., in which a blind patron alleged that the restaurant chain’s website was not equally accessible to visually impaired people (Sean Gorecki v. McDonald’s Corporation, No. 1:17-cv-03036, N.D. Ill.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Allegations of infringement were properly dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), because the patent in suit claims ineligible subject matter, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed Nov. 3 (Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Erie Indemnity Company, et al., No. 17-1147, Fed. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 22060).
DENVER — A Utah federal judge’s decision to deny The SCO Group Inc. leave to amend its tortious interference complaint against International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) to add a new claim for copyright infringement was affirmed Oct. 30 by the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (The SCO Group Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 16-4040, 10th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 21487).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A limited exclusion order entered by the International Trade Commission (ITC) against Arista Networks Inc. based upon findings that Arista infringed three Cisco Systems Inc. patents was upheld Oct. 18 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which found no error in the ITC’s determination of infringement (Arista Networks Inc. v. International Trade Commission, No. 16-2563, Fed. Cir.).
HARRISBURG, Pa. — A Pennsylvania appellate panel on Nov. 13 found that an employee’s tweet, which led to her dismissal, did not violate her employer’s social media policy and, thus, did not constitute willful misconduct to disqualify her from receiving unemployment compensation (UC) benefits (Waverly Heights Ltd. v. Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, No. 312 CD 2017, Pa. Cmwlth.).
By Vivian Cullipher