Patent Infringement

News & Analysis as of

IEEE Clarifies Obligations When Licensing Standards-Essential Patents

In one of our previous advisories (see, In Ericsson v. D-Link The Federal Circuit Provides Guidance on Damages for Standard Essential Patents) we discussed the Federal Circuit's recent decision in Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link,...more

District Court Denies Motion in Limine Seeking to Preclude Advice of Counsel Defense Even Though Plaintiff Was not Able to Obtain...

The Plaintiff filed a motion in limine seeking the district court to preclude the Defendant from offering at trial any testimony regarding the Defendant's opinion of counsel defense that was not disclosed during discovery. As...more

Google Remains on the Hook After Summary Judgment Denied

Judge Rya W. Zobel’s recent decision denying a set of Google’s summary judgment motions has cleared the way for trial. Skyhook initially sued Google for infringement of thirteen patents. Currently, eight patents remain at...more

Four Mile Bay Sues Zimmer Holdings

Four Mile Bay, LLC recently sued Zimmer Holdings, Inc. in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. The complaint alleges that Zimmer Holdings’ hip implants, such as the “Trabecular Metal Primary...more

The Apparently Never-Ending Story of Bard v. W.L. Gore - Bard Peripheral Vascular Inc. and C.R. Bard, Inc. v. W.L. Gore &...

In a case centered about patent that matured from an application filed 40 years ago, a case that has been pending for 12 years and that just completed its fourth engagement at the appellate level, the U.S. Court of Appeals...more

IP Newsflash - February 2015 #3

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Federal Circuit Throws Out $2 Million Award to Nvidia and Sony - Despite the Supreme Court's Octane Fitness decision making it easier to award attorneys’ fees, the Federal Circuit has...more

Federal Circuit Review - February 2015

More Deference to District Courts in Claim Construction - In TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS USA, INC. v. SANDOZ, INC., No. 13-854, the Supreme Court held that factual findings underpinning claim construction rulings are reviewed...more

Protegrity’s “Bare Bones” Allegations Result in Dismissal, Again

In yet another case in the District of Connecticut, Protegrity has seen its claims for indirect and willful infringement dismissed because, according to the court, its complaint did not plead sufficient facts. District Judge...more

Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter #49

We are pleased to present the 49th edition of the Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter. This month, we highlight recent cases that address patent infringement claims, erroneous termination of security...more

Design Protection Goes Global: The Hague Agreement Will Change Industrial Design Strategies

The Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs, more commonly known as the “Hague Agreement,” is a treaty that establishes an international filing system for industrial design...more

A Slip of the Pen May Cost You Your IPR

The Patent Office is getting inter partes review (IPR) petitions by the boat load. Some patent challengers are adding to the volume by filing numerous IPRs against a single patent. They use each IPR for a distinct set of...more

District Court Denies Motion to Lift Stay Pending Inter Partes Review Even Where Plaintiff Agreed to Not Pursue Claims That Were...

Barco filed a patent infringement action in September 2011 against Defendants Eizo Nanao Corporation and Eizo Nanao Technologies, Inc. ("Eizo"), alleging that Eizo infringed various claims in U.S. Patent No. 7,639,849 (the...more

Supreme Court Announces Standard of Review for Factual Issues Underlying Patent Claim Construction: Implications Beyond Patent Law

The United States Supreme Court, clarifying the proper standard of review of factual findings arising during a court’s construction of patent claims, held that such “evidentiary underpinnings” should be reviewed for clear...more

Court Precludes Expert’s Lost Profits Testimony

Andrews, J. Defendants’ motion to preclude plaintiff’s expert’s testimony is granted with respect to lost profits and denied with respect to reasonable royalty. The court took testimony and held oral argument on January 30,...more

The Medicines Co. v. Mylan Inc.

Case Name: The Medicines Co. v. Mylan Inc., Civ. No. 1:11-cv-1285, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152433 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 27, 2014) (St. Eve, J.) (Generic drug manufacturer was liable for patent infringement as a matter of law when the...more

Cubist Pharms., Inc. v. Hospira, Inc.

Case Name: Cubist Pharms., Inc. v. Hospira, Inc., No. 12-367-GMS, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 169679 (D. Del. Dec. 8, 2014) (Sleet, J.) (Valid certificate of correction results in finding of infringement and validity; remaining...more

Rosebud v. Adobe: District Court Grants Summary Judgment of No Remedies Where Plaintiff Could Not Prove Actual Notice of Patent...

Rosebud filed a patent infringement action Adobe and Adobe moved for summary judgment arguing that Rosebud had no remedy for its patent against Adobe. Adobe based its summary judgment motion on the argument that the...more

Declarant Must Be Made Available for Deposition in the United States - Square, Inc. v. REM Holdings 3, LLC

Addressing the location of a deposition of patent owner’s declarant, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) concluded that, absent an agreement between the parties to...more

Spineology Sues Wright Medical Technology

Spineology, Inc. sued Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (Wright Medical) in the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota . Spineology’s complaint alleges that Wright Medical’s X-REAM percutaneous expandable...more

Court Report - February 2015 #4

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Novartis Vaccines and Diagnostics, Inc. et al. v. Pfizer, Inc. 2:15-cv-01283; filed February 18, 2015 in the District...more

The Suprema Federal Circuit En Banc Hearing: The Full Court's Decision May Impact the ITC's Remedial Authority

On February 5, 2015, the Federal Circuit sat en banc and heard oral argument after vacating a panel decision in Suprema, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, 742 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2013). The panel decided that the ITC lacks...more

Allergan, Inc. v. Actavis, Inc.

Case Name: Allergan, Inc. v. Actavis, Inc., Nos. 14-cv-638, 14-cv-188, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 176551 (E.D. Tex. Dec. 23, 2014) (Gilstrap, J.) (Only an ANDA “received” by the FDA can form the basis for a patent infringement...more

Spectrum Pharms., Inc. v. Sandoz Inc.,

Case Name: Spectrum Pharms., Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., No. 2:12-cv-111-GMN-NJK, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 179755 (D. Nev. Dec. 29, 2014) (Navarro, J.) (Because the ANDA product did not meet the claimed dosage strength,...more

Texas Court Holds No Duty to Defend Claims of Monopolistic Practices

In its recent decision in Uretek United States v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18610 (S.D. Tex. Feb. 17, 2015), the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas had occasion to consider a general...more

Intellectual Property Alert: Federal Circuit Considers Whether ITC Can Properly Exclude Imported Products That Only Infringe...

On February 5, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit sitting en banc heard oral arguments in Suprema, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Fed. Cir., No. 2012-1170, a case involving the ability of the International Trade...more

1,128 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 46