We use cookies on this site to enable your digital experience. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our cookie policy. close

Mealey's Patents

  • June 28, 2019

    Panel Upholds $21M Award In Satellite Communication Patent Row

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 26 agreed with a Texas federal judge that a jury verdict of willful patent infringement was supported by the evidence and left intact that jury’s award of $21,075,750 in damages (Elbit Systems Land and C4I Ltd., et al. v. Hughes Network Systems LLC, No. 18-1910, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18852).

  • June 28, 2019

    Appellant Tells Panel Patent Board Erroneously Construed Terms

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 10 appellant brief, Cook Group Inc. urges the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to direct the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to revisit a final written decision in an inter partes review (IPR) that confirmed as patentable five claims of a medical device patent (Cook Group Inc. v. Boston Scientific Scimed Inc., Nos. 19-1413, -1422, Fed. Cir.).

  • June 27, 2019

    Amici Debate PTO’s Entitlement To Attorney Fees In Supreme Court Patent Case

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 25 amicus curiae brief, the New York Intellectual Property Law Association (NYIPLA) tells the U.S. Supreme Court that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) was not entitled to an award of attorney fees, despite prevailing in a lawsuit brought by a patent applicant, because Section 145 of the Patent Act does not explicitly provide for such an award (Laura Peter v. NantKwest Inc., No. 18-801, U.S. Sup.).

  • June 27, 2019

    Panel Agrees: Patented Bracelet Loom Not Infringed By Competitor

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 24 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no error in a Michigan federal judge’s claim construction or summary judgment of noninfringement in connection with a loom for making bracelets and other linked articles (Choon’s Design LLC v. IdeaVillage Products Corp., No. 18-1934, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18701).

  • June 26, 2019

    Cross-Appellant Says Jurisdiction Lacking Over Patent Owner Appeal

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An oilfield services company on June 20 filed a principal and response brief with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, in which it again maintained that appellate jurisdiction is lacking over a patent owner’s challenge of a Texas federal judge’s claim construction and stipulated final judgment (EnerPol LLC v. Schlumberger Technology Corp., Nos. 2019-1079, -1120, Fed. Cir.).

  • June 26, 2019

    Sanofi Defends Validity Of Pen Injector Patent Before Patent Board

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 25 filing with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH pointed to the “overwhelming” commercial success of its “LANTUS® SoloSTAR®” pen injector as evidence of non-obviousness (Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GMBH, No. IPR2018-01678, PTAB).

  • June 26, 2019

    Patent Board Cancels Claims, Denies Patent Owner Leave To Amend

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 26 final written decision, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board deemed 15 claims of a patented radio controlled toy unpatentable as obvious and rejected efforts by the patent owner to substitute the canceled claims (SZ DJI Technology Co. Ltd. v. DroneControl LLC, No. IPR2018-00208, PTAB).

  • June 26, 2019

    Single Claim Of Computer Memory Patent Singled Out In New Petition

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 24 petition for inter partes review Intel Corp. told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a single claim of a patented computer system should be canceled as obvious (Intel Corp. v. VLSI Technology LLC, No. IPR2019-01192, PTAB).

  • June 25, 2019

    Google Petitions Board For Review Of Broadcast Multimedia Patent

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patent directed to a method and apparatus for controlling presentation rates of broadcast multimedia is anticipated and rendered obvious by prior art, Google LLC asserts in a June 21 petition for inter partes review (IPR) by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Google LLC v. Virentem Ventures LLC, No. IPR2019-01246, PTAB).

  • June 25, 2019

    Supreme Court Denies Certiorari In Dispute Over Scope Of ‘Offer To Sell’

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The question of whether a sale must take place domestically to assert infringement under Section 271(a) of the Patent Act won’t be answered by the U.S. Supreme Court, which on June 24 denied certiorari in dispute over ambient light sensors (Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America Inc., No. 18-600, U.S. Sup.).

  • June 24, 2019

    Dispute Over Patent Priority Dates Won’t Be Heard By High Court

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 announced that it will not review a 2017 ruling by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that affirmed the rejection of a petition for inter partes review because the filing relied on unavailable prior art (Ariosa Diagnostics Inc. v. Illumina Inc., No. 18-109, U.S. Sup).

  • June 24, 2019

    Federal Circuit Affirms: ‘Gamvatar’ Gaming Patent Is Obvious

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 21 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that 11 claims of a patented process for generating a “gamvatar” are invalid (Game and Technology Co. v. Activision Blizzard Inc., et al., No. 18-1981, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18601).

  • June 24, 2019

    Certiorari Granted In Dispute Over Appealability Of Patent Time Bar

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — The U.S. Supreme Court on June 24 agreed to take on a dispute that poses the question of whether Section 314(b) of the America Invents Act (AIA) permits an appeal of a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) with regard to the time bar established by Section 315(b) of the statute (Dex Media Inc. v. Click-To-Call Technologies L.P. and Andrei Iancu, No. 18-916, U.S. Sup.).

  • June 21, 2019

    Federal Circuit Upholds Cancellation Of Patent Covering Antifungal Drug

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 21 ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no error in findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that eight claims of a patented composition of largely insoluble azole antifungal drugs would be anticipated or rendered obvious by prior art (Mayne Pharma International Pty Ltd. v. Merck, Sharpe & Dohme Corp., No. 18-1593, Fed. Cir.).

  • June 20, 2019

    Claimed Concepts Were Well-Known, Petitioner Tells Patent Board

    ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 18 petition for inter partes review (IPR), a Canadian telecommunications company maintains that two claims of a patented process for managing content and services over a network were well-known in 2012 at the time of patenting (Guest Tek Interactive Entertainment Ltd. v. Nomadix Inc., No. IPR2019-01191, PTAB).

  • June 19, 2019

    Board Rejection Of Samsung Patent Allegations Reversed By Panel

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — An unsuccessful inter partes review (IPR) proceeding initiated by Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. will be revisited in light of a June 18 decision by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that reversed findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that Samsung failed to establish obviousness (Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. v. UUSI LLC, No. 18-1310, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18185).

  • June 18, 2019

    Judge:  Company’s Unfair Competition Claim Against Apple Superseded By CUTSA

    OAKLAND, Calif. — A federal judge in California on June 17 ruled that a technology company has failed to sufficiently show that Apple Inc. engaged in unfair competition under California common law when it allegedly infringed on the company’s patented technology and intellectual property to develop its “Emergency SOS” product for its Apple devices because the claim is preempted by federal patent law and is superseded by the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act (CUTSA) (Zomm LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 18-4969, N.D. Calif., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 101029).

  • June 18, 2019

    Federal Circuit Affirms: Workpiece Support Reissue Patent Is Invalid

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A federal judge in Oklahoma did not err in finding that because a reissue patent claims an invention not disclosed by the original patent, the reissue claims fail to comply with the original patent requirement of the Patent Act, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found June 17 (Forum US Inc. v. Flow Valve LLC, No. 18-1765, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 18055).

  • June 18, 2019

    Panel Finds No State Sovereign Immunity In Inter Partes Reviews

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — Efforts by the Regents of the University of Minnesota (UMN) to avoid a challenge to various UMN patents were unsuccessful June 14, when the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that states do not enjoy sovereign immunity in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings (Regents of the University of Minnesota v. LSI Corporation, et al., No. 18-1559; Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Ericsson Inc., Nos. 2018-1560, -1561, -1562, -1563, -1564, -1565, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17887).

  • June 18, 2019

    Rejection Of Interpolation Patent Application Upheld By Federal Circuit

    WASHINGTON, D.C. — A patent application relating to a “method of efficiently implementing a multi-dimensional interpolation” was properly rejected, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled June 13 (In re: Roman Gitlin, No. 18-1461, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 17702).

Can't find the article you're looking for? Click here to search the Mealey's Patents archive.