Latest Posts › Patent Infringement

Share:

WDTX Magistrate Judge Grants Stay Pending IPR Despite Alleged Delay Tactics by Defendant in Pre-Suit Negotiations

The Western District of Texas granted a motion to stay a patent infringement lawsuit pending inter partes review not only because doing so would simplify the issues in the still-early litigation and reduce the burden on the...more

Merger of District Court Dismissals Torpedoes Appeal from PTAB Decision at Federal Circuit

The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal of a final written decision in an IPR based on issue preclusion where a district court had dismissed a complaint finding the patent claims subject-matter ineligible. The patentee had...more

Delay in Correcting Disclosure of Real Parties-in-Interest not Procedurally Fatal to IPR Petition

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board instituted an inter partes review over patent owner’s objections that the petition did not timely identify all real parties-in-interest (RPI) and was filed by a phantom legal entity after...more

Patent Infringement Suit Against Indemnitee Forecloses IPR Petition by Indemnitor

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board denied institution of a petition for inter partes review under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because the petition was filed more than one year after patent owner had served a complaint for patent...more

Termination of IPR Proceeding on the Eve of Final Written Decision Dooms Joinder Attempt

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has denied institution and joinder of an inter partes review petition after determining that the petition was not only time-barred but that joinder was also foreclosed. In making its...more

Redacted Settlement Offers Are Admissible to Show Industry Practice for FRAND Negotiations

In advance of a new trial to determine damages for patent infringement, a district court denied plaintiff’s motion to preclude defendants from introducing the terms of plaintiff’s settlement offers. The district court...more

Noninfringement Defense Based on Prior Commercial Use Under 35 U.S.C. § 273 Must Be Timely and Expressly Pleaded

The district court in a patent infringement case granted plaintiff’s ex parte request to strike defendant’s prior use defense under 35 U.S.C. § 273. Because defendant failed to plead the defense and did not raise it until...more

Service of Complaint Without Exhibits Does Not Trigger the One-Year Time Bar to File IPR

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board held that service of a bare complaint without exhibits did not trigger the one-year time bar under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b), which requires the filing of a petition for inter partes review within...more

Director Vidal Hands Down Precedential Decision on Issue of First Impression Addressing Patentability of Multiple Dependent Claims

Patent Office Director Katherine Vidal recently issued a precedential decision addressing an issue of first impression before the Board: whether the patentability of multiple dependent claims must be determined separately for...more

USPTO Director Issues Second Sua Sponte Precedential Decision Addressing Abuse of Process

In the wake of her October 4, 2022 Precedential OpenSky decision, the United States Patent and Trademark Office Director Katherine Vidal issued another precedential decision further clarifying the actions that should be...more

USPTO Director Issues Sua Sponte Precedential Decision Addressing Abuse of IPR Process

In a precedential 52-page sua sponte decision, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Katherine Vidal addressed several issues of first impression relating to sanctionable misconduct in inter partes...more

PTAB Orders Production of Final Infringement Contentions from Related Litigations Because they were Inconsistent with Patent...

Petitioners moved for an order requiring Patent Owner to produce discovery comprising Final Infringement Contentions from related district court litigations between the parties.  Petitioners set forth two independent bases...more

System Prior Art Allowed at Trial Despite Arguments that Related Printed Publications Could Have Been Asserted in Parallel IPR...

In a recent order, the Eastern District of Texas declined to preclude a defendant from raising prior art system references despite patentee’s argument that similar printed publications could have been raised in earlier inter...more

Future Tense in Contractual Language Found Insufficient to Convey Title, Depriving Party of Right to License Patent

Applying recent Federal Circuit precedent requiring language evincing a present conveyance of patent rights, a district court in the Western District of Pennsylvania found that the contractual language “shall become the...more

Speculative Allegations Regarding Operation of Accused Website Doom Patent Infringement Complaint

A judge in the Northern District of Georgia has granted a defendant’s motion to dismiss a patent infringement case for failure to state a claim under Rule 12(b)(6). The court found that the complaint failed to meet the...more

Cancellation of Independent Claims in IPR Does Not Estop Doctrine of Equivalents Arguments for Surviving Dependent Claims

A judge in the Eastern District of Virginia recently held that cancellation of independent claims in an inter partes review (IPR) did not preclude the plaintiff from asserting infringement based on the doctrine of equivalents...more

U.S. and U.K. Governments Seek Immediate Stakeholder Input on SEP/FRAND Policy

Successfully licensing standard-essential patents (SEPs) is key to a company’s ability to manufacture and sell products that practice a standard. With revolutionary advances in technology on the horizon, licensing of SEPs...more

Accused Infringer Not Judicially Estopped from Asserting Claim Construction Different from that Previously Presented to PTAB

During a Markman hearing, a judge in the Eastern District of North Carolina denied a plaintiff’s request that the defendant be judicially estopped from arguing claim constructions that were different from positions the...more

Timing is Everything: Accused Infringer’s IPR Victory Estops Its Own Prior Art Invalidity Defenses, but Does Not Estop Plaintiff...

Inter partes review (IPR) proceedings can give rise to statutory and collateral estoppel. But these two bases for estoppel attach at different times, which can lead to asymmetrical outcomes in related district court...more

Despite TC Heartland, Forum Selection Clause Controls Venue in Patent Dispute

A district court has ruled that the exclusive statute for determining venue in patent cases, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), did not override the parties prior agreement on where suit could be brought. The court also ruled that transfer...more

Strength of Objective Indicia from Prior Litigation Overcomes Strong Obviousness Challenge in IPR

In a recent inter partes review (IPR), a patent owner overcame a facially persuasive obviousness challenge by relying on evidence from an earlier litigation to establish objective indicia of nonobviousness. In RTI...more

No IPR Estoppel Despite Purportedly “Gratuitous” Inclusion of Physical Device in Invalidity Defenses

A district court has ruled that the statutory estoppel arising from an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding does not apply to anticipation and obviousness defenses that rely significantly on a physical device. The court also...more

District Court: Prosecution History Context Defeats Written Description Requirement

The District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia recently found method of treatment claims directed to treating a specific disease at a specific dose invalid for lack of written description based on the context...more

Can ‘Loophole’ in IPR Statute Lead to Resurgence of DJ Actions?

Declaratory judgment (“DJ”) actions have fallen out of favor in patent cases in recent years. In 2011, DJ complaints made up approximately 11 percent of all patent cases filed that year. Last year, they made up less than 5...more

PTAB’s Claim Construction Not Binding on District Court Despite Affirmance by Federal Circuit of PTAB’s Unpatentability...

An accused infringer in a district court case could not take advantage of a prior claim construction ruling from an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding involving unasserted claims of the same patent. The Patent Trial and...more

65 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide