WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in declaring an audio-conferencing patent not indefinite, nor in denying a petitioner for inter partes review (IPR) of that patent its request for sanctions against the patent owner, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled June 1.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Responding to an amicus curiae brief in which the United States recommended that its petition for certiorari be denied, a winch manufacturer on May 24 filed a supplemental brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to resolve confusion that has existed in the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ decisions in recent years over the delegation of claim construction duties per Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. and the Seventh Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals correctly found that Apple Inc. lacks standing under Article III of the U.S. Constitution to challenge the validity of two patents it allegedly infringed, the United States tells the U.S. Supreme Court in a requested May 24 amicus curiae brief, opining that Apple’s petition for certiorari should be denied because the appeals court’s ruling was “case-specific” and focused on a license agreement that resolved the underlying patent infringement suit.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 6 appellant brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a software company says its patented accounting system was erroneously declared ineligible following an improper application of the two-step test set forth in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l.
MARSHALL, Texas — An expert on damages in a patent infringement dispute can assume that the infringement took place as a basis for forming a conclusion, a Texas federal magistrate judge ruled May 25, denying a motion to exclude.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — One year after the U.S. Supreme Court asked the U.S. solicitor general (SG) to weigh in on questions of patentability under Section 101 of the Patent Act, the United States on May 24 filed an amicus curiae brief supporting the petitioner’s bid for certiorari and opining that the present infringement lawsuit “is a suitable vehicle for providing greater clarity” about the two-step framework “for determining whether a patent claim is ‘directed to’ a patent-ineligible concept.”
SACRAMENTO, Calif. — A California federal judge on May 24 granted a meat substitute maker’s application for discovery from another meat substitute company into the intent of emails sent to an investor alleging trade secret misappropriation pertaining to one company’s patent, leading both parties to file complaints accusing each other of violating California’s unfair competition law (UCL).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Final written decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in six inter partes reviews (IPRs) that a patented method of producing phytase is anticipated or obvious were upheld May 24 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 23 order addressing three separate petitions for mandamus, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said a federal judge in Texas abused his discretion in refusing to transfer allegations of patent infringement to California federal court.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 20 upheld a jury’s determination that Microsoft Corp. infringed a patent directed to the automatic generation of an end-user interface and the jury’s award of $7 million in damages.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a May 20 ruling, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board revealed that it will not assess the patentability of roof underlayment technology on grounds that the petitioners were served with a complaint for patent infringement more than one year before seeking inter partes review (IPR).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a May 19 request for inter partes review (IPR) of a patent disclosing a swimming pool with a plurality of wave generating chambers, fans, a controller and a plenum, two petitioners say the Patent Trial and Appeal Board should cancel 20 patent claims.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 19 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals vacated the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that a reference relied upon by Google LLC in seeking inter partes review (IPR) of two patents did not qualify as prior art.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 16 appellee brief, Google LLC urges the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals to uphold a final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that deemed three claims of a patent directed to a method of establishing a network connection unpatentable.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patented formulation of zeaxanthin, zinc, vitamin E and vitamin C for the treatment of macular degeneration was rendered obvious or anticipated by prior art, Bausch & Lomb Inc. told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on May 17.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that determined that various claims of a remote-control monitoring patent are not unpatentable was vacated and remanded May 16 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which again ruled that the board erred in its construction of “scalable address.”
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 13 holding, a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that it lacks jurisdiction to review a determination by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that an inter partes review (IPR) request was untimely.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A petition for writ of certiorari that sought clarification on the proper standard for granting enhanced damages in a patent infringement action was denied May 16 by the U.S Supreme Court.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In its May 16 orders list, the U.S. Supreme Court said it will not hear a dispute over the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ increasing reliance on the Kessler doctrine in patent infringement lawsuits.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Utah federal judge’s summary judgment of noninfringement will stand, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled May 11, rejecting a patent owner’s challenge to the construction of various disputed claim limitations.