WASHINGTON, D.C. — A petition for a writ of mandamus directing a Texas federal judge to rule on a pending motion to dismiss allegations of patent infringement was turned away June 16 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 17 opinion, a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a rejection by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of allegations of unpatentability leveled by Microsoft Corp. in connection with a server for data processing online via reconfigurable computing elements.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A patented method for determining arrhythmia through the use of photoplethysmography (PPG) and electrocardiogram (ECG) sensors would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art (POSITA), Apple Inc. told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board June 9.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A claim construction order by a federal judge in Texas came under fire May 24 when an appellant told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that its patent was wrongly held indefinite for lack of corresponding structure.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 16 summarily affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a patent directed to the delivery of “applets” to an end user’s mobile device are patentable.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — An appellant tells the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a June 3 brief that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in allowing the owner of an audio-conferencing patent to substitute new claims in an inter partes review (IPR.)
ALEXANDRIA — In a June 11 request for post-grant review, two petitioners maintain that a recently issued patent relating to making mobile payments should be canceled on a variety of grounds, including patent ineligibility and indefiniteness.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A panel majority of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 11 found no error in a California federal judge’s decision to dismiss allegations that Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. infringed patented digital camera technology.
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a June 11 petition for inter partes review (IPR), Johnson & Johnson Surgical Vision Inc. (J&J) asserts that 11 claims of a patented “Phodisruptive Laser Treatment of the Crystalline Lens” would have been obvious to a person of skill in the art and should thus be canceled.
DENVER — The term “exceptional case” as it exists in Section 285 of the Patent Act does not differ in meaning from the term used in Section 1117(a) of the Lanham Act, a panel of the 10th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled June 8, affirming an award of attorney fees on behalf of defendants who prevailed on allegations that they violated an injunction entered in a trademark case.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a June 10 order, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said an antitrust lawsuit over continued enforcement of a patent previously declared unenforceable does not arise under federal patent law and should instead proceed in the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
WILMINGTON, Del. — In a June 9 holding, a federal judge in Delaware turned away a motion for judgment on the pleadings by two patent infringement defendants who question the plaintiff’s standing and compliance with the marking requirement.
CHICAGO — A method of protecting information stored on a computer by requiring multiple forms of authentication recites a patent-ineligible abstract idea, a federal judge in Illinois ruled June 9, dismissing an infringement action with prejudice.
SAN FRANCISCO — A California federal judge on June 8 denied a pharmaceutical company’s motion to exclude a competitor’s expert witness in a patent infringement case, finding that the expert met the qualifications set in Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 3 upheld a California federal judge’s construction of various disputed claim terms in a patent disclosing a “computer filing system for accessing files and data according to user-designated criteria.”
HOUSTON — A technology company involved in the hydraulic fracturing industry on May 28 sued a fracking services company in Texas federal court contending that it is liable for willful patent infringement.
TAMPA, Fla. — A Florida federal judge on May 25 denied a fan company’s motion to dismiss a rebuttal expert witness in a patent infringement case, finding that the expert’s opinions on the methodology and reliability of a survey are admissible under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals Inc.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Patent Trial and Appeal Board correctly concluded that “comprising” claim language in a vascular stent patent is “open-ended” and “consistent” with the term’s “well-understood meaning,” Abbott Vascular Inc. and several subsidiaries argue in a May 18 brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In what it said was the “first time” it has considered the issue, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on June 1 ruled that when defending the denial of a patent application pursuant to Section 145 of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 145, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) may invoke prosecution laches.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Two mobile technology firms embroiled in a patent dispute centering on the infringement determination method for standard-essential patents on May 28 filed, respectively, a motion to delay distribution of the case in the U.S. Supreme Court and a corresponding opposition brief, with the parties disputing whether the requested one week would be prejudicial.