Motorola

News & Analysis as of

When Can Common Sense be Relied Upon to Find an Invention Obvious?

All patent practitioners recognize that a single prior art reference can be used to reject claims in an obviousness rejection. However, the issue is whether the Patent Office must provide additional evidence, above and beyond...more

PTAB Reversed–Common Sense Improperly Used to Supply Missing Limitation in Obviousness Inquiry

In a rare rebuke of the PTAB’s discretion, the Federal Circuit has outright reversed a finding of obviousness based on the Board’s misapplication of the law on the permissible use of “common sense” in an obviousness analysis....more

The PTAB Review - August 2016

Covered Business Method Patent Review: What Constitutes a Financial Product or Service? Along with inter partes review (IPR) and post-grant review (PGR), the America Invents Act (AIA) created a transitional program for...more

Subsequent Employment Agreement Assigning Inventor's Intellectual Property Rights Does not Defeat Standing for Inventions Created...

The plaintiff, Odyssey Wireless ("Odyssey") filed four separate actions for patent infringement against Defendants Apple, Samsung, LG, and Motorola, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,881,393; 8,199,837; 8,576,940;...more

Where’s My %$^&# Dollar?

The issue of consideration in an assignment is always in the background, but only occasionally comes up. In Memorylink Corp. v. Motorola Solutions, Inc., 773 F.3d 1266, 113 USPQ2d 1088 (Fed. Cir. 2014), the Federal Circuit...more

Qualtrics, LLC v. OpinionLab, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

Focusing on the Claims, the PTAB Denies CBM Review of a Market Research Patent - On April 13, 2016, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution...more

Motorola Mobility, LLC, v. Intellectual Ventures I, LLC (PTAB 2016)

After Multiple CBM Petitions, Motorola Invalidates Software Patent - On March 21, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in the Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review...more

PTAB hits delete key on Intellectual Ventures patent for electronic content distribution

The most recent 101 PTAB road kill is an Intellectual Ventures, LLC, patent on electronic content distribution –  U.S. Patent No. 6,658,464 — in a CBM review of challenged claims 1, 8, 16, and 17 (reproduced below) brought by...more

Two Daubert Motions Are Granted.

M2M Solutions LLC v. Motorola Solutions, Inc., et al., C.A. No. 12-33 - RGA, February 25, 2016 - Andrews, J. Defendant’s motion to exclude damages experts’ testimony is granted. Plaintiff’s motion to exclude opinions of...more

Do Words Matter? GAO Decides “Yes” in Delivery Order Precedent Case

Do words matter? In a precedent-setting decision in Harris IT Services Corp., B-411699, B-411796, GAO said “yes.” In particular, GAO made clear that the phrase “delivery order” has a particular meaning under the law and that...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - October 2015

The Survey Says: Tiffany Is Not Generic for A Ring Setting - Last month, the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment to Tiffany & Co. on its trademark infringement claim against Costco Wholesale...more

Alert: Ninth Circuit Provides Guidance on RAND Licensing Obligations

On July 30 the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued a significant appellate decision that provides guidance regarding obligations imposed on licensors of patents that are required to comply with interoperability...more

The Effect of Microsoft v. Motorola

Throughout U.S. patent law jurisprudence, a select number of cases have made significant changes to fundamental aspects of the process of patent litigation. Such milestone cases often eclipse the more specific details of the...more

Section 325(d) Does Not Preclude All Second Petitions - Motorola Mobility LLC v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC

Addressing its decision to institute a covered business method (CBM) patent review based on a second petition, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found that its decision...more

Court Orders Patent Troll to Pay Fees under Octane Fitness

On August 18, we posted about the Supreme Court’s Octane Fitness ruling and the potential consequences the case may have on the future of patent litigation. It appears at least one New York federal judge followed the Supreme...more

Intellectual Property and Technology News - Issue 27 Q3 2015

In This Issue: How Private is That Connected Car? US v EU Among the fastest growing sectors in the industry of smart things is the connected car. No longer a simple way from point A to point B, cars now...more

Standard-essential Patents and the RAND Requirement: Recent Decisions on Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory Royalties

Issues related to standard-essential patents (SEPs) have generated significant attention in the wake of the first appellate decisions on royalties for SEPs – Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Systems. 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014)...more

Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Based on Unpatentability Under Section 101 Denied Where Patents Were Not Directed to an...

Defendants Motorola Mobility, LLC, Amazon.com, Inc., Apple Inc., Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Huawei Device USA, Inc., HTC Corp., HTC America, Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and...more

Ninth Circuit Upholds Judge Robart’s RAND Determinations in Microsoft v. Motorola

Late last month, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued its much-anticipated decision in Microsoft v. Motorola, a breach of contract action brought by Microsoft alleging that Motorola violated its commitment to license its...more

Motorola and the Extraterritorial Application of US Antitrust Laws to Foreign Component Price Fixing Cartels

Last month the Supreme Court declined to accept an appeal for two related antitrust cases involving an international price-fixing cartel. The cases come from different circuits, one was criminal and the other civil, but they...more

Ninth Circuit is the First Appeals Court to Rule on RAND/SEP Licensing

In a decision written by Judge Marsha S. Berzon, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appels for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a first-of-its-kind district court judgment relating to royalty rates for standard-essential...more

What is a RAND Licensing Rate? The Ninth Circuit Weighs in.

July has just ended, and SEP and FRAND issues are in the air. On July 8, the Japan Fair Trade Commission (JFTC) sought public comments on its proposed amendments to its Guidelines for the Use of Intellectual Property under...more

Ninth Circuit Affirms District Court Decision Regarding Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (RAND) Obligations in Patent Licensing...

In a recent decision, the Ninth Circuit affirmed a jury verdict awarding Microsoft $14.5 million for Motorola's breach of its obligation to offer Microsoft reasonable and non-discriminatory (RAND) licenses for certain...more

Ninth Circuit Upholds Landmark FRAND Decision and Jury Verdict

The Ninth Circuit yesterday (July 30, 2015) issued one of the most significant appellate opinions regarding standard essential patents (SEPs) subject to commitments to license on fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory...more

Ninth Circuit Upholds First District Court Determination of FRAND Licensing Rate and Affirms $14.5 Million Damage Award

The Ninth Circuit has affirmed Microsoft’s $14.5 million jury verdict against Motorola, upholding the first federal bench trial decision setting a fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing rate. Armed with...more

90 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

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

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.
×