Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC

Contact
Share
Info
5445 Corporate Dr
Suite 200
Troy, MI 48098, United States
Phone: (248) 641-1600
Fax: (248) 641-0270
Areas of Practice
  • Appellate Practice
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Law & Trade
  • Litigation
  • Science, Computers, & Tech
Locations
Other U.S. Locations
  • Michigan
  • Missouri
  • Texas
  • Virginia
Number of Attorneys
100+ Attorneys

IPR Estoppel: Ripe for Gamesmanship?

In Douglas Dynamics LLC, v. Meyer Products LLC, [14-cv-886-jdp] (D. Wisc. Document # 68 April 18. 2017), the district court considered the scope of estoppel after an Inter Partes Review (IPR). The Court identified three…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property

Little Words That Can Make a Big Difference: i.e. Versus e.g.

The difference between “i.e.” (id est, “that is”) and “e.g.” (exempli gratia, “for example”) comes up in patent cases from time to time. While the difference is not always clear to some practitioners, it is clear to the Federal…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Failure of Licensee to Mark May Upend $15.7 Million Damage Award

In Rembrandt Wireless Technologies, LP v. Samsung Electronics CO., LTD., [2016-1729] (April 17, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s claim construction and denial of Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL), but…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Civil Remedies, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Policing the Trademark Playground and Calling Out Bullies

The prevailing defendant in Louis Vuitton v. My Other Bag, LLC (previously blogged about in Louis Vuitton Left Holding the Bag), in a Motion filed on April 7 in the Southern District of New York (Case 1:14-cv-03419-JMF Document…more
 /  Art, Entertainment, & Sports Law, Civil Procedure, Civil Remedies, Communications & Media Law, Intellectual Property

“Begun, the Clone War Has”

Hot on the “heels” of the Supreme Court’s decision in Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., (2:17-cv-02523) PUMA SE has sued Forever 21 in the Central District of California for, among other things, copyright infringement…more
 /  Art, Entertainment, & Sports Law, Intellectual Property

Trust but Verify – When Speculation and Assertion Are Not Enough

In a non-precedential opinion in Gravelle v. Kaba Ilco, Co., [2016-3218] (April 12, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding of summary judgment for Kaba on the grounds that the plaintiff (Gravelle) did…more
 /  Business Torts, Civil Procedure, Civil Remedies, Intellectual Property

An Omitted Inventor Can’t Correct Inventorship of a Patent Owned by a Government Agency

In a non-precedential opinion in Ali v. Carnegie Institution of Washington, [2016-2320] (April 12, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal, on grounds of sovereign immunity, of Ali’s lawsuit to be added as a…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Education, Intellectual Property

Just Because the Board Didn’t Say It, Doesn’t Mean that the Board Didn’t Think It

In Novartis AG v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Limited, [2016-1352] (April 12, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s determination that the challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,324,283, and Novartis’ proposed substitute…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

When is a Missing Feature Not There?

TDY industries received a patent (US 7,244,519) for a cutting tool with a binder comprising ruthenium and a physical vapor deposition (PVD) coating. TDY then sued Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co. for infringement of the ‘519 patent in…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property

Don’t Exalt Slogans over Real Meaning; Find the Claim Construction that Naturally Aligns with the Specification and Prosecution History

In The Medicines Company v. Mylan, Inc., [2015-1113, 2015-1151, 2015-1181] (April 6, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of non-infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,598,343, and reversed a bench trial determination…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Wasica Decision Reinforces Federal Circuit Guidance on Claim Construction

The Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Wasica Finance v. Continental Automotive Systems touched on a number of well-worn patent issues, but this article focuses on a few key claim construction principles discussed by the CAFC,…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Novartis v. Noven: The PTAB is not Bound by Prior Decisions of District Courts

Novartis, together with LTS Lohmann Therapie-Systeme, owns a pair of patents covering rivastigmine transdermal patches. These patches are useful for treating Alzheimer’s disease. Noven Pharmaceuticals filed an abbreviated new…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Dependent Claims Were Anticipated While Independent Claims Were Not

In Duncan Parking Technologies, Inc. v IPS Group, Inc., [IPR2016-00067] (March 27, 2017) the PTAB found that claims 8 and 10 of U.S. Patent No. 7,854,310 were anticipated under 102(e), while claims 1–5, 7, and 9 — including the…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property

Soft Kitty, Warm Kitty, Little Furry Plaintiff …

In Chase v. Warner Bros. Entertainment, Inc., 1:15-cv-10063-NRB (March 27, 2017), Judge Buchwald of the Southern District of New York, granted Warner Bros. motion to dismiss a copyright infringement suit brought by the daughters…more
 /  Art, Entertainment, & Sports Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Prior Art that Must be Distorted from its Obvious Design Does Not Anticipate

In In re Chudik, [2016-1817] (March 27, 2017), the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination that claims 1, 15, 18, and 33–40 of U.S. Patent Application 11/525,631 on an implant for shoulder replacement surgery were…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property
Showing 1-15 of 843 Results
/
View per page
Page: of 57
This profile may constitute attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any correspondence with this profile holder does not constitute a client/attorney relationship. Neither the content on this profile nor transmissions between you and the profile holder through this profile are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.

"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:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!