Podcast Episode 187: Will AI Kill SEO?
State AG Pulse | The Laboratories of Democracy
Interview With Ayesha Minhaj, Google - Digital Planning Podcast
Insurtech Briefly Podcast: Licensing, Google and Lead Gens
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Andy Warhol's Prince Prints: Not Fair Use!? (Part Two)
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Andy Warhol's Prince Prints: Not Fair Use!? (Part Two)
Episode 169 -- DOJ Files Antitrust Case Against Google
Do I need permission to use images from Google on my website?
Data Privacy Trouble Surrounding Google Street View Cars Presents Lesson for Smaller Companies
Weekly Brief: New Round of Layoffs Hit Law Firms
FCC to Create Free National Super WiFi Network? Not Anytime Soon—Dana Frix
The Outcome of the PTAB’s Analysis May Determine Whether the PTAB Engaged in Claim Construction - In Google LLC v. Ecofactor, Inc., Appeal No. 22-1750, the Federal Circuit held that the outcome of the PTAB’s analysis of...more
Today, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision vacating and remanding a PTAB decision based on an erroneous implicit claim construction. Google v. EcoFactor, Case Nos. 2022-1750, 2022-1767 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 7, 2024)....more
Somebody’s Wrong: PTAB Must Resolve Conflicting Factual Testimony During IPR - In Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., Appeal No. 21-1179, the Federal Circuit held that, for purposes of determining whether a reference was...more
DATA ENGINE TECHNOLOGIES LLC v. GOOGLE LLC. Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee that relies on language in the preamble to...more
PersonalWeb Technologies LLC v. Google LLC, Appeal Nos. 2020-1543, -1553, -1554 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 12, 2021) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s judgment on the pleadings that...more
Google applied for a patent on video-on-demand systems. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board affirmed the examiner’s rejection of the claims as obvious, stating that Google’s responses to the examiner’s rejections were...more
[co-author: Kathleen Wills] Last year, the global COVID-19 pandemic created unprecedented challenges for American courts. By making several changes, however, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was able to...more
In In re: Google Technology Holdings LLC, the Federal Circuit held that Google forfeited its claim construction arguments made on appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board). The court explained that whether these...more
In In re: Google Technology Holdings LLC, No. 2019-1828 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 13, 2020), the Federal Circuit elaborated on the policies underlying waiver and forfeiture of appellate arguments. Ultimately, the court affirmed the...more
IN RE: GOOGLE TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS LLC - Before Taranto, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claim construction arguments are forfeited if not raised before the PTAB. The PTAB...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2508 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 6, 2019) In an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the District of...more
While affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision to invalidate a patent as obvious, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the PTAB incorrectly concluded that an examiner’s statements in a...more
In a decision dated February 27, 2017, the Board denied institution of Google Inc.’s petition for Covered Business Method Patent Review of claims 20, 21, 23–26, 28, and 29 of U.S. Patent No. 6,128,651 (“the ’651 patent”)...more
A recent decision from Judge Stearns sheds new light on a dispute between Lexington Luminance (“Lexington”) and Google over LED technology. The dispute began in November, 2012, when Lexington accused Google of infringing...more
Federal Circuit Construes Claim Term in a Manner that Rendered Claim Language Superfluous - In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Commc’ns AB, Appeal No. 2015-1251, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s...more
28 U.S.C. § 1782: A Powerful Tool in Global Disputes - As the number and complexity of cross-border and multi-jurisdictional disputes increase, companies can use 28 U.S.C. § 1782 to obtain evidence from U.S.-based...more
When inter partes review (IPR) proceedings became effective in September 2012, few people would have predicted the transformative effect it would have on patents and the litigation landscape. Three years in, IPR has become...more
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in the Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz Inc. case to determine whether appellate courts should afford any deference to a trial court's claim construction...more