News & Analysis as of

Estoppel

Building seawall erodes homeowners' rights to challenge conditions

by Thompson Coburn LLP on

The California Supreme Court recently held that you can’t have your cake and eat it, too. Two adjacent homeowners, with oceanfront properties in Encinitas, California, live on a coastal bluff that “cascades steeply down to...more

Defence & Indemnity - June 2017 : Insurance Issues B. Stairs v. CFM Corp., 2017 NBCA 8 [4226]

by Field Law on

I. INSURANCE ISSUES B. In Alberta an insured’s settlement with a third party which releases the third party does not preclude the insured’s insurer from pursuing a subrogated claim against the third party. Elsewhere in...more

The STRONGER Patents Act: Swinging the Pendulum in Favor of Patent Owners

by Bass, Berry & Sims PLC on

While the House Judiciary Committee conducts hearings today on "The Impact of Bad Patents on American Businesses," a movement is afoot in the Senate to revitalize the U.S. patent system. On June 21, 2017, a bipartisan group...more

Federal Circuit Review - June 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

Inter Partes Reexamination Estoppel Attaches On Claim-by-Claim Basis for New Requests and Pending Proceedings - In In re Affinity Labs Of Texas, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2016-1092, 2016-1172, the Federal Circuit held that the...more

A Refresher on Re-Examination Estoppel

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the pre-AIA estoppel provision of 35 USC § 317(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision not to terminate all pending re-examinations of a patent...more

Issue Six: PTAB Trial Tracker

by Goodwin on

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari to Decide Whether IPRs Are Constitutional - The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to answer the following question: Whether inter partes review – an adversarial process used by the...more

Senate’s STRONGER Patents Act Aims to Address Key PTAB Patent Owner Woes

by Jones Day on

On June 21, Senators Chris Coons (D-Del), Tom Cotton (R-Ark), Dick Durbin (D-Ill), and Mazie Hironoa (D-Hawaii) introduced the “Support Technology & Research for Our Nation’s Growth and Economic Resilience Patents Act of...more

Intellectual Property Newsletter - June 2017

by Shearman & Sterling LLP on

Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its quarterly newsletter. The newsletter covers a wide range of current IP topics: the Supreme Court’s TC Heartland patent-venue decision, the constitutionality of inter...more

New HOA Estoppel Requirements Signed into Law

Title insurance companies and closing agents handling transactions involving homeowners’ and condominium associations have long been frustrated by the timing and cost associated with obtaining estoppel letters from these...more

Client Alert Update: Community Associations’ Estoppel Certificates

On June 14, 2017, Governor Scott signed Senate Bill 398, enacting it into law. The law, which goes into effect on July 1, 2017, amends sections 718.116, 720.30851, and 719.108, Florida Statutes, regarding condominium,...more

Estoppel in CBMR is Both Reviewable and Determined on a Claim by Claim Basis

In Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, [2016-2001](June 9, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB decision that Westlake was not estopped to bring a Covered Business Method Review challenge to U.S. Patent No....more

Tenth Circuit Finds CERCLA Contribution Claim Not Barred by Bankruptcy Approval of a Settlement Estimating Liability for the Site

Asarco LLC v. Noranda Mining, Inc., 844 F.3d 1201 (10th Cir. 2017). In a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) contribution action, the Tenth Circuit ruled that a mining company, whose...more

District Court Adopts Narrow Reading of Shaw and Finds that IPR Estoppel Applies to Manuals for Prior Art Products

Last year, the Federal Circuit in Shaw Industries Group, Inc. v. Automated Creel Systems, Inc. articulated that a petitioner is not estopped from relying on a ground on which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) declined...more

Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services (Fed. Cir. 2017)

Claims Directed to Providing Financing for Allowing a Customer to Purchase a Car found Invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 - In a precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit affirmed a final written decision of the Patent Trial...more

Inter Partes Re-Examination Estoppel Saves Rejected Claims

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing statutory estoppel issues in connection with inter partes re-examination, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to dismiss a re-examination against certain...more

PTAB Denies Apple's Motion to Withdraw IPR Petition and Motion for Joinder

by Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB denied Apple’s motion to withdraw both its IPR petition and concurrent motion for joinder to prevent Apple from circumventing potential estoppel ramifications in Apple Inc. v. Papst Licensing GmbH & Co. KG,...more

Issue Five: PTAB Trial Tracker

by Goodwin on

SUPREME COURT WILL REVIEW PTAB PRACTICE OF PARTIAL INSTITUTION - The Supreme Court has granted certiorari in SAS Institute Inc. v. Lee, No. 15-969 (Fed. Cir.), to examine the Board’s practice of instituting IPR on fewer...more

Supreme Court Grants Cert In SAS To Decide Required Scope Of PTAB Decision

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

On May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Lee, where it has been asked to decide whether the PTAB is statutorily required “to issue a final written decision as to every claim challenged...more

Court Clarifies Meaning of “Ground for Invalidity” for Purposes of Post-IPR Estoppel

A district court judge recently addressed the scope of estoppel for a petitioner in an inter partes review (IPR). Specifically, the court clarified the meaning of a “ground for invalidity” as it relates to the estoppel effect...more

EDTX Interprets Federal Circuit Precedent Narrowly, Recommends Applying §315 Estoppel Broadly

by Jones Day on

In Biscotti Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., Magistrate Judge Payne recommended that estoppel under §315(e) apply broadly against Microsoft in an upcoming patent infringement trial scheduled for early June 2017. No....more

Biscotti Inc. v. Microsoft Corp. (E.D. Tex. 2017)

Magistrate Recommends Narrow Interpretation of Inter Partes Review Estoppel Provision - Earlier this month, in Biscotti Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., U.S. Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern...more

Post-Grant Proceedings Overview

by Morgan Lewis on

Post-Grant Proceedings Chart - Effect of concurrent proceedings - For Inter Partes Review (IPR) - ..No IPR may be filed by a party (1) that previously challenged the validity of a claim of the patent in a civil...more

Magistrate Judge Recommends IPR Estoppel Bar of Prior Art References

by Knobbe Martens on

A magistrate judge in the Eastern District of Texas recommended in Biscotti, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2:13-CV-01015, DI 191 (E.D. Tex. May 11, 2017) that Microsoft should be estopped from asserting invalidity grounds that...more

PTAB: No Estoppel Because A Skilled Searcher Could Not Have Found Company Brochures

by Knobbe Martens on

In a Final Written Decision in Johns Manville Corp. v. Knauf Insulation, Inc., IPR2016-00130, Paper 35 (P.T.A.B. May 8, 2017), the PTAB found that petitioner Johns Manville (JM) was not estopped from raising its own company...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more

222 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 9
Cybersecurity

"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.