Collateral Estoppel Patents

News & Analysis as of

Collateral Estoppel Bars Plaintiff’s Infringement Claims.

Robinson, J. Defendant’s motions for summary judgment of non-infringement due to collateral estoppel and for invalidity are granted. The parties’ motions to exclude opposing expert testimony are denied as moot....more

No Collateral Estoppel in Subsequent Case Where Decision in Earlier Case Subject to Multiple Possible Theories - United Access...

Addressing the applicability of the collateral estoppel doctrine, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that there was no collateral estoppel barring the patentee from reasserting the same patent claims...more

Even after Jury Trial and Final Judgment in Favor of Patent Owner, Collateral Estoppel of Invalidity from a Subsequent, Other...

The plaintiff, U.S. Ethernet Innovations, LLC ("USEI"), filed a patent infringement action against several defendants in the Eastern District of Texas. The district court then transferred the cases to the Northern District of...more

Collateral Estoppel in Claim Construction

e.Digital Corp. v. Futurewei Technologies, Inc. - Addressing the issue of collateral estoppel as it relates to an earlier claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part and...more

Ineligible Subject Matter in One Court Is Still Ineligible in Another

DietGoal Innovations LLC v. Chipotle Mexican Grill, Inc. - Addressing the issue of whether the court was bound by another court’s holding that a patent was invalid for being directed to patent-ineligible subject...more

FTC v. Cephalon, Inc.

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The issue in this case is not whether the validity of the ’516 patent should be litigated in the antitrust trial, but rather, how the court’s previous finding of invalidity and...more

Invalidity under § 101 and defensive collateral estoppel defeat second DietGoal case

CaDietGoal Innovations LLC v. Time, Inc. Case Number: 1:13-cv-08381 - Last month, in DietGoal Innovations LLC v. Bravo Media LLC, Case No. 1:13–cv-08391–PAE, we reported on Judge Engelmayer’s invalidation of...more

A second patent in a chain falls to obviousness-type double patenting challenge

The court had previously determined that The Kennedy Trust’s U.S. Patent No. 7,846,442 (the “parent patent”) was invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (“ODP”) to U.S. Patent No. 6,270,766 (“the grandparent“). At issue...more

An arbitration award may not be the end of the road in patent disputes - Several cases serve as examples to the contrary

When a patent dispute goes to arbitration, there is the possibility that an outside party could try to influence the outcome by going to court. This may come as a surprise, given that Section 294 of the Patent Act specifies...more

Patent Watch: Aspex Eyewear, Inc. v. Zenni Optical, LLC

On April 19, 2013, in Aspex Eyewear, Inc. v. Zenni Optical, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Newman,* Prost, Reyna) affirmed the district court's ruling that prior litigation collaterally estopped Aspex...more

MBHB Snippets: Review of Developments in Intellectual Property Law - Fall 2012 - Volume 10, Issue 4: Post-Grant Review: A...

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), signed into law in 2011, promises the most radical changes to U.S. patent law in over 50 years. The act eliminates the first-to-invent system of granting patents in favor of a...more

11 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* 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.
×