News & Analysis as of

Limelight Networks Limelight v Akamai

Weintraub Tobin

Divided Infringement – Expanding Patent Infringement Liability

Weintraub Tobin on

In 2015, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals cast the net of patent infringement liability even more broadly, to cover direct infringement by “divided” (or “joint”) infringement. Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight...more

Weintraub Tobin

Federal Circuit Applies Broadened Test For Divided Infringement

Weintraub Tobin on

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

Weintraub Tobin

Divided Infringement: A Stronger Sword for Plaintiffs

Weintraub Tobin on

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has established a new test for “divided” patent infringement. Direct infringement of a method patent exists when a single party performs all of the steps of the claimed method. 35 U.S.C....more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - August 2015

WilmerHale on

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IP Newsflash - August 2015 #4

SUPREME COURT CASES - The Supreme Court Upholds Prohibition on Charging Royalties After Patent Expiration - In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment LLC, 576 U.S. ---- (2015), the Supreme Court declined to overrule its 1964...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

1. Background - In 2006, Akamai Technologies ("Akamai") sued Limelight Networks, Inc. ("Limelight") in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,108,703. The...more

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Supreme Court Moves to Clarify Induced Infringement Standard

In its most recent pronouncement on patent law, the U.S. Supreme Court once again corrected the Federal Circuit’s understanding of induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(b). On May 26, 2015, in Commil USA, LLC v....more

Lathrop GPM

Akamai Reversed - Liability for Inducing Infringement Requires Proof of Direct Infringement by One Person

Lathrop GPM on

The United States Supreme Court in its opinion Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., 572 U. S. ____; Slip Op. No. 12–786 (June 2, 2014) (“Akamai”) holds that there cannot be liability for inducing...more

King & Spalding

ITC Section 337 Update – August 2014

King & Spalding on

Fifth Annual "Live at the ITC" – On July 30, 2014, the Fifth Annual Forum on Section 337 and Other Developments at the U.S. International Trade Commission, entitled Live at the ITC, was co-sponsored by the ABA-IPL...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

After the Supreme Court's Limelight Decision, Attention May Shift to Contract Analysis in Patent Cases

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Tech., Inc., the Supreme Court unanimously held that there can be no liability for induced infringement of a patented method where the steps of the method are carried out by separate...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

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