WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, without explanation, on Jan. 15 upheld a Texas federal judge’s order requiring Apple Inc. and Cisco Systems Inc. (Apple, collectively) to pay a patent owner more than $400 million (VirnetX Inc. v. Cisco Systems Inc. and Apple Inc., No. 18-1197, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 1260).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a final written decision issued Jan. 15, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board sided with inter partes review (IPR) petitioner Google LLC on the software giant’s claim that a patent relating to retrieval of a World Wide Web (WWW) page using a minimally restrictive syntax is obvious (Google LLC v. Spring Ventures Ltd., No. IPR 2017-01653, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — Allegations that a patent covering endodontic instruments would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA) were turned away Jan. 14 by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Edge Endo LLC v. Michael Scianamblo, No. IPR2018-01322, PTAB).
RALEIGH, N.C. — Allegations by Panduit Corp. that two patents were directly and indirectly infringed by Corning Inc. were dismissed without prejudice Jan. 14 by a North Carolina federal judge, who deemed the claims inadequately pleaded (Panduit Corp. v. Corning Inc., No. 18-229, E.D. N.C., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5960).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ ruling that an Indian tribe’s sovereign immunity cannot shield a drug company from inter partes review (IPR) of patents should be vacated because it conflicts with U.S. Supreme Court precedent, a tribe and drugmaker argue in their petition for a writ of certiorari, docketed Jan. 11 with the high court (Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe, et al. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., No. 18-899, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 11 heard oral arguments in a dispute over four point-to-point network communications patents allegedly infringed by Cisco Systems Inc. and Apple Inc. (Straight Path IP Group LLC v. Apple Inc., et al., Nos. 18-1491, -1492, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Jan. 11 petition for inter partes review (IPR), Huawei Device USA Inc. and related entities assert that two claims of a patented 3D pointer would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA) (Huawei Device USA Inc., et al. v. Cywee Group Ltd., No. IPR2019-00563, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Citing an intervening invalidation by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of four of six asserted claims in an underlying patent dispute on remand from the U.S. Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Jan. 11 remanded the dispute to a Texas federal judge for a new determination of lost profits potentially due to a patent owner (WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., Nos. 2013-1527, 14-1121, 14-1526, 14-1528, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 998).
BOISE, Idaho — A patent owner on Jan. 11 persuaded an Idaho federal judge that his August construction of the disputed claim term “high electric field” was erroneously limiting (J.R. Simplot Company v. McCain Foods USA Inc., No. 16-449, D. Idaho, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 5825).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Oral arguments were held Jan. 10 before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a dispute over patented laboratory methods for detecting the enzyme myeloperoxidase (MPO) in the blood (The Cleveland Clinic Foundation, et al. v. True Health Diagnostics LLC, No. 18-1218, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — An appeal of a Delaware federal judge’s determination that a patented pharmaceutical tablet with a core composed of a “macroscopically homogenous composition” for controlling the release of budesonide was not infringed by a proposed generic is before the Federal Circuit, which heard oral arguments in the case on Jan. 10 (Cosmo Technologies Ltd., et al. v. Actavis Laboratories Fl. Inc., et al., Nos. 18-1335, -1336, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that declared obvious all claims challenged by a trio of inter partes review (IPR) petitioners was upheld in its entirety on Jan. 10 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Realtime Data LLC v. Andrei Iancu, Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, No. 18-1154, Fed. Cir.).
MINNEAPOLIS — A Minnesota federal judge on Jan. 10 found that efforts by a patent plaintiff to cure deficient allegations of patent infringement are “futile” and “in bad faith” because the new allegations “directly conflict with admissions” made in the plaintiff’s original complaint (ecoNugenics Inc. v. Bioenergy Life Science Inc., No. 17-5378, D. Minn., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4792).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A petitioner for inter partes review (IPR) prevailed in part on Jan. 9 before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, which, in a final written decision, agreed that various claims of a patented method for synthesizing encoded modules would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (Nuevolution A/S v. Chemgene Holdings APS, No. IPR2017-01598, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In invalidating various patent claims on reconsideration from a prior final written decision — in which it also found obviousness — the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not exceed its authority and deprive a patent owner of a fair process, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Jan. 9 (AC Technologies S.A. v. Amazon.com Inc. and Blizzard Entertainment Inc., No. 18-1433, Fed. Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on Jan. 7 agreed to consolidate two lawsuits that center on allegations that a former Power Integrations (PI) Inc. employee breached his agreement with the circuit supply company and then used their proprietary information to obtain patents in the United States and Korea (Power Integrations Inc. v. Chan-Woong Park, Nos. 16-2366, -2367, N.D. Calif.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a Jan. 8 petition filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Spotify USA Inc. asserts that a patent relating to the generation of a user profile based upon analysis of a playlist would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA) (Spotify USA Inc. v. S.I. SV. EL. Societa Italiana Per Lo Sviluppo Dell’Elettronica S.p.A, No. IPR2019-00522, PTAB).
NEW YORK — In a Jan. 7 ruling, a New York federal judge rejected efforts by a pharmaceutical group to amend their patent invalidity, declaratory judgment complaint to buttress a claim that an inventor committed inequitable conduct before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) (Ferring B.V. et al., v. Serenity Pharmaceuticals LLC et al., No. 17-9922, S.D. N.Y., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2673).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court in its Jan. 7 order list asked the federal government to weigh in on whether Section 271(a) of the Patent Act allows infringement claims to be brought against a foreign party based on where an offer to sell an item is made or whether the statute focuses on where the actual sale will take place (Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America Inc., No. 18-600, U.S. Sup.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a Jan. 2 response brief, a patent owner maintains before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a conditional cross-appeal by an infringement defendant that prevailed before a Texas federal judge should be dismissed for lack of standing (EnerPol LLC v. Schlumberger Technology Corporation, Nos. 2019-1079, -1120, Fed. Cir.).