Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Could Netflix Be Liable in "When They See Us" Defamation Case?
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Could Netflix Be Liable in "When They See Us" Defamation Case?
Chief Judge Lynn in the Northern District of Texas recently granted a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss a complaint alleging patent infringement because the claim-at-issue recites patent-ineligible subject matter under 35...more
In recent years, District of Delaware Judges, including Judge Richard Andrews, have helped to manage the high volume of patent litigation cases by referring 12(b)(6) motions to dismiss to Magistrate Judges. Last week, in...more
Allegations of indirect patent infringement require, among other things, pleading that the defendant had knowledge of the asserted patent. It is not well-settled law, however, whether notice of a complaint itself satisfies...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Stragent, LLC v. BMW of North America, LLC et al., Civil Action No. 20-510-LPS (D.Del. March 25, 2021) (consolidated), the Court denied Defendants’ motions to...more
While a district court in California remained “skeptical” of the patent eligibility of three computer-implemented patents, the court denied a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found that claim...more
Somewhat remarkably, there is no settled Federal Circuit precedent regarding where a patentee can bring suit against a generic competitor in Hatch-Waxman litigation under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(2). While recognizing that this...more
On July 30, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, in APS Technology, Inc. v. Vertex Downhole, Inc. et al, No. 19-cv-01166, denied Vertex Downhole’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss APS’s patent...more
The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s dismissal because the claims directed to an interactive video game for learning to play guitar were patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In its ruling, the court...more
In a recent order issued in the Northern District of Texas, Judge Godbey denied a Defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion despite the Federal Circuit’s holding that the asserted patent was invalid as indefinite. Hyosung TNS, Inc. v....more
On December 5, 2019, Judge David C. Godbey of the Northern District of Texas denied the defendant Diebold Nixdorf, Inc.’s (“Diebold”) motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), in Nautilus Hyosung Inc. v. Diebold, Inc. et al.,...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit revived a patent infringement suit brought by Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Forderung der angewandten Forschung E.V. against Sirius XM Radio Inc. in the District of Delaware when it vacated the...more
This post continues our monthly summary of patent litigation in the District of Minnesota, including short summaries of various substantive orders issued in pending cases....more
In Curver Luxembourg, SARL v. Home Expressions Inc. (No. 2018-2214, Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2019), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a design patent infringement suit that alleged infringement of U.S. Des. Pat. No....more
The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision barring Amgen from asserting an infringement claim under the doctrine of equivalents against Coherus Biosciences because Amgen disclaimed all combinations not identified...more
Addressing the various factors a court may consider in order to determine whether a claim is “directed to” an abstract idea, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of all claims...more
Can a party that did not submit an abbreviated biologics license application or an abbreviated new drug application, but will market the biosimilar or generic product after U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval, be sued...more
By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in 3 Shape A/S v. Align Technology, Inc., the Court denied Defendant’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s claims for direct, indirect and willful infringement...more
On May 3, 2018, Nike filed a lawsuit against Puma in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts accusing Puma of infringing seven of its utility patents related to footwear. In an earlier post on this blog, we...more
On October 29, 2018, United States District Judge P. Kevin Castel (S.D.N.Y.) issued a decision granting Defendant Bloomberg's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss iSentium's patent infringement claim because it is directed to...more
A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Reyna, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. Summary: A complaint that attaches the asserted patents, specifically...more
After having its complaint for patent infringement dismissed for failure to state a claim and being denied its request to file an amended complaint in the Middle District of Georgia, Disc Disease Solutions turned to the...more
In 2014, the United States Supreme Court in a landmark decision in the field of Patent Law (Alice Corp. v. CLS Int’l) invalidated software patents related to mitigating settlement risk. Relying on the now-infamous Section...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, Appeal No. 2017-1842 (March 7, 2018) - In Ottah v. Fiat Chrysler, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s grant of summary judgment of non-infringement as to...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Moore, Schall, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Northern District of Illinois. Summary: A plaintiff need not prove its case of patent infringement at the pleading stage. To the extent a...more