Indefiniteness

News & Analysis as of

Court Denies Summary Judgment Motion as Premature Prior to Markman Hearing

Pipeline Technologies Inc. ("Pipeline") filed a patent infringement action against Telog Instruments Inc. ("Telog"). Telog filed a motion for summary judgment, seeking summary judgment on the ground that the disputed claims...more

Court Finds Patent Indefiniteness In Unobtrusive Claims

In Interval Licensing LLC v. AOL, Inc., the Federal Circuit applied the test for patent indefiniteness set forth in the recent Supreme Court decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, and found that claims reciting an...more

Ongoing Developments in Patent Law: Claim Construction on Appeal, Indefiniteness, and PTAB Decisions

There are a few patent cases to keep track of in the future that may have an impact on claim construction, indefiniteness, and Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions. ...more

Supreme Court's Decision on Indefiniteness Constitutes Basis to Reconsider Prior Claim Construction Order But Does Not Result in...

In this patent infringement action, Defendant Lighthouse Photonics Corporation's ("Lighthouse") moved to reconsider the Court's Claim Construction Order. Lighthouse argued three reasons for reconsideration: "first, Newport...more

Identifying Class of Algorithms Insufficient To Satisfy Means-Plus-Function Structure Requirement

Triton Tech of Texas, LLC v. Nintendo of America, Inc. - Addressing whether a patent specification provided adequate specificity to satisfy indefiniteness scrutiny of a means-plus-function claim, the U.S. Court of...more

Federal Circuit Review - Nautilus, Limelight, and Alice (July 2014)

Supreme Court Sets New Indefiniteness Standard - In Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., Appeal No. 13-169, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded Federal Circuit’s reversal of summary judgment because the...more

Motion to Stay Pending CBM Review Granted Where Non-Practicing Entity Did Not Seek Preliminary Injunction

Boku, Inc. ("Boku") filed a CBM petition with the PTAB seeking review of the patentability of Plaintiff's U.S. Patent No. 7,273,168 (the "'168 patent"). The petition challenged all claims of the '168 patent on grounds that...more

IP Newsflash - July 2014 #2

New Nautilus Indefiniteness Standard Justifies Submission of Expert Evidence at Markman Hearing - The court granted defendants' motion to supplement their claim construction briefing with an expert declaration...more

Recent SCOTUS Decisions in Intellectual Property Cases

The U.S. Supreme Court heard a landmark number of intellectual property cases during its 2013-2014 term. Below is a summary of recent decisions issued in 2014....more

Lessons from Nautilus v. Biosig at the Supreme Court  [Video]

David K.S. Cornwell, director at the intellectual property law firm Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox, P.L.L.C., discusses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. He examines the...more

Rebalancing Indefiniteness: Nautilus v. Biosig

In a highly anticipated decision, the Supreme Court has rejected the Federal Circuit’s standard for indefiniteness – that a claim is indefinite only when it is not amenable to a construction or “insolubly ambiguous” – and...more

Indefiniteness Standard During Prosecution

In re Packard - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision upholding an examiner’s indefiniteness rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), invoking the...more

Supreme Court Corner - Q2 2014

Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. - Patent: Decided: April 29, 2014 - Holding: A patent case is “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 when it “stands out from others with respect to the...more

Supreme Court's Indefiniteness Ruling Has Immediate Impact at ITC

After a hearing in an Investigation occurred between February 24 and March 7, 2014 and with the parties having submitted their opening post-hearing briefs on March 21, 2014 and their reply post-hearing briefs on March 28,...more

Further Guidance on Indefiniteness Following the Supreme Court's Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. Decision

The Supreme Court's decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369 (2014) appeared to raise the bar for patent clarity. However, the true effects of the decision will not be seen for some time, if ever. In...more

In Nautilus, Supreme Court Relaxes Standard for Finding Patents Invalid for Indefiniteness

The U.S. Supreme Court, in Nautilus v. Biosig, recently reversed a Federal Circuit ruling that a patent is valid as long as the description of what it claims is not “insolubly ambiguous.” The Supreme Court’s decision, which...more

Inconsistent Figures Render Two Design Patents Indefinite

Spanx, Inc. v. Times Three Clothier, LLC - Case Number: 1:13-cv-02157-DLC (Dkt. 58) - Judge Cote construed claims in six design patents, and determined that two of the patents were indefinite. The patents at...more

Supreme Court Sets Forth New Standard for Indefiniteness, Requiring Greater Precision in Claim Terms than the Standard Long Used...

For over a decade, to show that a claim term is invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶2, the Federal Circuit has required that such terms be "not amenable to construction" or "insolubly ambiguous." The Supreme Court in...more

ITC Section 337 Update

U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Federal Circuit Standards For Patent Inducement Infringement And Indefiniteness – In two decisions on June 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court materially changed the standards for patent...more

Supreme Court Adopts Reasonable Certainty Test for Definiteness

On June 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., rejecting the Federal Circuit’s “insolubly ambiguous” test for patent claim indefiniteness under 35 USC § 112, and...more

Patent Law Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Makes It Easier to Knock out Vague Patents

Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard by which companies may seek to invalidate a patent for being overly vague, reversing a decision of the Federal Circuit regarding the definiteness standard of Section 112...more

U.S. Supreme Court Issues Two Significant Patent Rulings

Ruling unanimously twice in one day, the Supreme Court of the United States has issued two significant patent decisions that will significantly impact patent litigation in the future. ...more

The Supreme Court Overturns Two More Federal Circuit Decisions

In a continuing a pattern that has seemingly developed over the past several years, the Supreme Court recently overturned two more Federal Circuit decisions relating to key aspects of patent law. In the first case, Nautilus...more

Supreme Court Unanimously Rejects Federal Circuit Standards for Indefiniteness and Induced Infringement

The US Supreme Court issued two anticipated decisions on June 2, 2014, relating to the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's standards for indefiniteness and induced infringement. In the first, Nautilus, Inc....more

U.S. Supreme Court Makes It Easier to Knock Out Patents For Indefiniteness in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.

On June 2, 2014, the United States Supreme Court unanimously ruled that “a patent is invalid for indefiniteness if its claims, read in light of the specification delineating the patent, and the prosecution history, fail to...more

60 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3