PROVIDENCE, R.I. — A federal jury in Rhode Island on May 3 awarded an Italian company $6.5 million in damages after finding that its former employee and competitor misappropriated certain of its trade secret information for its erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) analyzer technology (Alifax Holding SpA v. Alcor Scientific Inc., et al., No. 14-440, D. R.I.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on May 1 upheld a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that adopted an examiner’s rejection of three claims of a patent application relating to electroplating metals or alloys (In re: Uri Cohen, No. 18-1609, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 13133).
SAN FRANCISCO — Although agreeing with a California federal magistrate judge that copyright claims levied against Microsoft Corp. that involve conduct taking place before the filing of a 2013 patent infringement action are subject to claim preclusion, the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 2 found that a plaintiff may proceed with allegations that the software giant continued to infringe its copyrights through sales taking place after the patent case was filed (Media Rights Technologies Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 17-16509, 9th Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 13239).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a May 1 holding, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed an award of attorney fees on behalf of two patent infringement defendants who prevailed at a bench trial on the question of patent validity (ThermoLife International LLC, et al. v. Hi-Tech Pharmaceuticals Inc., et al., Nos. 2018-1657, -1666, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 13135).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In a May 1 patent owner response, Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC maintains before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that inter partes review (IPR) is not warranted because the patent in suit is neither anticipated nor obvious (Netflix Inc. v. Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC, No. IPR2018-01227, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — All six claims of a profile-matching patent owned by the operator of online dating websites www.match.com and www.okcupid.com should be canceled, an inter partes review (IPR) petitioner told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on April 30 (Bumble Trading Inc. v. Match Group LLC, No. IPR2019-1000, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a March 25 appellant brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a patent owner accuses the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of issuing an “overbroad” construction of several claim terms, resulting in an improper invalidation of two patents (CCS Technology Inc. v. Panduit Corporation, Nos. 2019-1286, -1287, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an April 30 petition filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Apple Inc. asserts that a wireless security device that places a call to an emergency telephone number based upon a user’s location via Bluetooth technology was taught by prior art (Apple Inc. v. Zomm LLC, No. IPR2019-01030, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an April 22 petition for mandamus filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, a patent owner and its licensee assert the U.S. Court of Federal Claims abused its discretion when, in an April 2019 unpublished decision, it refused to order a third-party government contractor to produce documents showing the functionality of its source code (In re 3rd Eye Surveillance LLC, et al., No. 19-119, Fed. Cir.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A patent application relating to a system and method for managing complex organizations was properly rejected as ineligible for patenting, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals said April 29 (In re: Morinville, No. 18-1895, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 12745).
DENVER — A federal judge in Colorado on April 16 ruled that a genuine issue of material fact exists in a hydraulic fracturing patent infringement case because the exact role of the fuel sensor that is in dispute is unclear based on expert testimony (Frac Shack Inc. v. Fuel Automation Station LLC, et al., No. 16-2275, D. Colo., 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65127).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an April 26 decision, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found no error in a final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that confirmed the validity of 22 claims of a patented method for reducing the toxic effects of chemotherapy (Neptune Generics LLC, et al. v. Eli Lilly & Company, No. 18-1257, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 12492).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an April 22 appellee brief filed with the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) maintains that an application to patent a method for providing recommendations over the Internet recites patent-ineligible subject matter (In re: Greenstein, No. 19-1382, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A recent petition for inter partes review (IPR) of a motion capture patent should be rejected because a person of skill in the art would have no motivation to combine the prior art references relied on in the petition, the patent owner told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on April 23 (Blast Motion Inc., et al. v. NewSpin Sports, No. IPR2019-00538, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an April 19 divided ruling, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a patent claim construction of “instructions” by an administrative law judge (ALJ) and found that under the construction, an investigation by the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) was properly terminated (iRobot Corporation v. International Trade Commission, No. 18-1690, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 11408).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Although leaving intact a California federal judge’s preliminary injunction that ordered an appellant to withdraw three petitions for review filed with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 18 remanded with instructions to modify the relief (Dodocase VR Inc. v. MerchSource LLC, No. 18-1724, Fed. Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — A recent final written decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a prior art reference anticipates five patent claims should be vacated, and the claims should instead be confirmed as patentable, the patent owner told the board April 17 (Power-Packer North America Inc., d/b/a GITS Manufacturing Co. v. G.W. Lisk Company Inc., No. IPR2017-02034, PTAB).
WASHINGTON, D.C. — A divided panel of the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 17 left intact a Delaware federal judge’s denial of motions for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) regarding infringement and invalidity of a composite laminate patent (E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Company v. Unifrax LLC, No. 17-2575, Fed. Cir., 2019 U.S. App. LEXIS 11207).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. — In an April 16 petition for inter partes review (IPR), Microsoft Corp. told the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that a claimed digital media asset identification system and method owned by Uniloc 2017 LLC is unpatentable as obvious (Microsoft Corp. v. Uniloc 2017 LLC, No. IPR2019-00976, PTAB).
SAN DIEGO — A multibillion-dollar dispute in California federal court between Apple Inc. and Qualcomm Inc. over cellular chipset technology ended April 16, the second day of a trial, with a settlement between the parties, according to a docket minute entry (In re: Qualcomm Litigation, No. 3:17-cv-00108, S.D. Calif.).