Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments

News & Analysis as of

More Misinformation Regarding the Patent System and Non-Practicing Entities

The press has been all too eager to decry the so-called "broken" U.S. patent system and the alleged "scourge" of non-practicing entities (NPEs). However, few if any articles attempt to provide an even-handed analysis of...more

Don’t Forget Indefiniteness as a Ground for Invalidation in a CBM Patent Review

The PTAB recently instituted a covered business method patent review (CBM) based on grounds that include asserted indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph....more

Indefiniteness: Are You Reasonably Certain?

The indefiniteness standard has, until recently, been very high—only an “insolubly ambiguous claim” was considered indefinite (see, e.g., Honeywell Intern., Inc. v. International Trade, 341 F. 3d 1332, 1338–9 (Fed. Cir....more

Motion to Reconsider Claim Construction Order on Indefiniteness after Nautilus Denied Where District Court Found Term Definite

Defendant Stealth Cam, LLC ("Stealth Cam") requested that the district court reconsider its Claim Construction Order holding that the term "extending parallel" was not indefinite. The district court first noted that...more

Patent Update for IT and Biotech Companies: New Pieces to the Patent Puzzle

In This Presentation: - PATENT ELIGIBLE SUBJECT MATTER: LIFE IN SOFTWARE/IT AFTER ALICE CORPORATION V. CLS BANK (AND OTHER RECENT 101 DECISIONS) - A Brief History with respect to Software and Biz...more

Recent Developments in Patent Law for Medical Device Companies

In This Presentation: - Recent Patent Cases From The Supreme Court - Medical Device Patent Statistics and Cases - USPTO Post-Grant Proceedings: Lessons Learned After Two Years - Excerpt from Recent Cases...more

Patent Definiteness Requirement Update

The Supreme Court recently “conclude[d] that the Federal Circuit’s formulation, which tolerates some ambiguous claims but not others, does not satisfy the statute’s definiteness requirement.” Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig...more

Patent Law Developments: Indefiniteness and Damages

Interval Licensing v. AOL, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)- The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s opinion in Interval Licensing v. AOL, Inc. is the first case interpreting the general (and highly criticized) standard...more

Recent Developments In Information Technology Law – Third Quarter 2014

The 2013-14 term of the Supreme Court ended with multiple decisions on intellectual property issues. Over the past few months, the Court issued a number of patent law related opinions covering ground from claim...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

Supreme Court Corner - Q3 2014

RECENT DECISIONS - NAUTILUS, INC. V. BIOSIG INSTRUMENTS, INC. Patent: Decided: June 3, 2014: Holding: In a unanimous (9-0) opinion authored by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the Court held that the Federal...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

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

BioPharma Patents Quick Tips and News - May/June 2014

QUICK TIPS - 35 U.S.C. 112 Tips: 1) Does your U.S. Examiner assert that not enough representative species are described in the specification? MPEP Section 2163 II.A.3(a)(ii) says that “(t)he written...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

IP Quarterly - Summer 2014

In This Issue: - Supreme Court Hears Six Patent Cases This Term - Is Implied License the New Fair Use? - Navigating the Murky Waters of the Domestic Industry Requirements in the International Trade...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

Intellectual Property and Technology News - Issue 22, Q2 2014

In This Issue: - Celebrity Endorsements on Social Media: 7 Tips For Navigating The Right Of Publicity - Landmark Privacy Ruling In Europe - US Congress May Act Again On Patent Reform - Supreme Court...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

Thoughts on Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l

There's an old saying that "bad facts make bad law," acknowledging that a court's decision regarding an extreme case can result in law that poorly serves less extreme cases. The Supreme Court's recent trio of 35 U.S.C. § 101...more

Triton Tech of Texas, LLC v. Nintendo of America, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)

A very experienced patent attorney once told me that you should never write means-plus-function claims unless there is a Luger at your temple. This, the first opinion addressing indefiniteness to come from the Federal...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

Supreme Court Update: Four Important Decisions for IP

In the recent cases OCTANE FITNESS, LLC v. ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC. and HIGHMARK INC. v. ALLCARE HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, INC., the U.S. Supreme Court empowered district court judges to award attorney fees to prevailing...more

66 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3