Direct Infringement

News & Analysis as of

Federal Circuit Applies Broadened Test For Divided Infringement

On April 18, 2016, the Supreme Court denied certiorari in Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 797 F.3d 1020 (Fed. Cir., August 2015) (“Akamai IV”), cert. denied, 2016 U.S. LEXIS 2768. The Court declined...more

Can Foreign Sales Infringe U.S. Patents?

It is a deceptively simple question with a not so simple answer. A purely foreign transaction is certainly beyond the reach of U.S. patent law, but what if part of the transaction occurs within the United States? For example,...more

Motion to Dismiss Granted: What Are The Facts?

Order Granting Motion to Dismiss, Bluestone Innovations LLC v. Bulbrite Industries, Inc., Case No. 15-cv-5478 (Judge Phyllis Hamilton) - Before the recent amendment to the Federal Rules abolishing form complaints, it was...more

Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tech. – Cert. Denied

Yesterday, the Supreme Court declined to hear Limelight’s petition for cert. on the question of whether an accused infringer may be held liable for direct infringement of a claim to a method where multiple parties perform the...more

Cisco v. Sprint: Declaratory Judgment Action Dismissed Where Cisco Could Not Show Case or Controversy Based on Suits Against...

Plaintiff Cisco Systems, Inc. ("Cisco") filed two declaratory judgment actions against Sprint seeking to invalidate six Sprint patents and seeking a declaration of non-infringement of seven Sprint patents. Cisco is a...more

Important Decisions on the Scope of the ITC's Authority

In the latter half of 2015, the Federal Circuit in Suprema v. ITC and ClearCorrect v. ITC issued two decisions addressing the scope of the International Trade Commission’s (“ITC”) authority to exclude infringing articles. In...more

It Ends Not with a Bang but a Whimper - Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc.

The patent case between Commil and Cisco, a case that made new law at the Supreme Court on the issue of the intent requirement in cases of induced infringement allegations, came to an end with a whimper on remand back to the...more

Plaintiff Secures Sweeping Jury Verdict in Hotly-Contested Patent Fight

In a long-running patent fight involving two medical device manufacturers, a Massachusetts jury determined last week that the defendant Kaz had infringed two of plaintiff Exergen’s patents relating to temporal thermometers,...more

Northern District of California Moves Quickly in Response to Rules Change to Apply Full Weight of Twombly and Iqbal to Patent...

Last month, the U.S. District Court in the Northern District of California ruled that the Federal Circuit’s somewhat bare pleading standard for direct patent infringement is no longer sufficient following recent amendments to...more

Changes to Federal Rules to affect patent infringement pleadings

Patent owners and businesses should be prepared for yet another change to patent infringement litigation. In April 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court adopted Congress’s amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which went...more

Limestone v. Apple: Apple Successfully Moves to Dismiss Willful Infringement Claims

Limestone filed a patent infringement action against Apple, alleging direct and willful infringement of four patents. For each of the four claims of patent infringement against Apple, Limestone alleged, "[u]pon information...more

CLIENT ALERT: Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Amendments to Take Effect December 1, 2015

On December 1, 2015, amendments to Rules 1, 4, 16, 26, 30, 31, 33, 34, 37, 55 and 84 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will become effective. These amendments were originally approved by the Judicial Conference in...more

Wrong Defendant, Wrong Court: Plaintiff Wrongly Targets Government Contractors Instead of U.S. Government - Astornet Technologies...

In a case addressing whether a patent holder can sue government contractors in district court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the dismissal of Astornet’s claims against three government contractors...more

Pleading Patent Infringement Without Form 18

On December 1, 2015, changes recommended by the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and adopted by the Supreme Court will take effect. Among these changes is elimination of the...more

Supreme Court Adopts Amendments to Federal Rules That May Deter Patent Infringement Lawsuits, Especially Those Filed by...

In April 2015, the United States Supreme Court adopted Congress’s amendments to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, in part abolishing Rule 84 and along with it Form 18, which allows plaintiffs to file bare-bones patent...more

October 2015: ITC Update

Suprema: Restoring the Reach of Section 337. On August 10, 2015, the Federal Circuit resolved the largest challenge to the International Trade Commission’s (“ITC”) jurisdictional reach in recent years: whether 19 U.S.C. §...more

Magistrate Recommends Not Dismissing Induced Infringement Claims, But It’s A Close Call

Elm 3DS Innovations, LLC v. SK Hynix Inc., et al., C.A. No. 14-1432 – LPS- CJB, October 16 , 2015. Burke, M. J. Report and Recommendation recommending that the court deny defendant’s motion to dismiss pre-suit induced...more

Patent Owner’s Licensing Program Was Fatal to Its Patent Infringement Theory - JVC Kenwood Corporation v. Nero, Inc.

Addressing whether an accused defendant infringed patents through the distribution of its software, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s summary judgment that the defendant did not...more

Divided Infringement Between Doctor and Patient

Recent jurisprudence on the issue of divided infringement has arisen in the context of computer-related technologies, where a user or customer performs one or more steps of a patented method. Now the issue has arisen in the...more

Federal Circuit Review | September 2015

Federal Circuit Remands Record Damages Award For New Trial On Extraterritorial Sales - In Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group, Ltd., Appeal No. 2014-1492, the Federal Circuit reversed a damages award...more

U.S. Government Patent Infringement Precludes Induced Infringement

In Astornet Technologies, Inc. v. BAE Systems, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s dismissed of actions for induced infringement where the alleged direct infringer was the U.S. government. In particular,...more

BioPharma Patents: Quick Tips & News - September 2015

For our BioPharma audience, you might be interested in Harness Dickey’s Quarterly BioPharma Newsletter, which reports on the impact of the Akamai v. Limelight, Suprema v. ITC, and Amgen v. Sandoz cases on the BioPharma...more

Akamai Technologies, Inc. V. Limelight Networks, Inc.: Federal Circuit Brings Defines Liability For “Joint Enterprises”

In Akamai v. Limelight, Inc., Case Nos. 2009-1372, -1380, -1416, -1417, (Fed. Cir. Aug. 13, 2015) (en banc), the Federal Circuit updated and clarified the standards for determining if direct infringement has occurred in cases...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - August 2015

The Dow Chemical Company v. Nova Chemicals Corporation (No. 2014-1431, -1462, 8/28/15) (Prost, Dyk, Wallach). Dyk, J. Reversing award of supplemental damages. "We hold that the intervening change in the law of...more

Direct Infringement Motion to Dismiss Under Form 18 Granted - Addiction and Detoxification Institute LLC v. Carpenter et al.

Addressing pleading requirements for direct and indirect infringement, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s determination that although pre-filing notice is not required to bring suit...more

88 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.
×