Patent Infringement

News & Analysis as of

Solo Inventor Files Two Suits Over Allegedly Infringing Uninterruptible Power Supply Systems

Walter Farmer, of Atlanta, Georgia, filed separate suits against Alpha Technologies, Inc, ("Alpha"), of Bellingham, Washington, and Aspin Kemp & Associates ("Aspin Kemp"), of Owen Sound, Ontario, Canada, alleging that each...more

Phased Discovery in Patent Litigation: A Powerful Tool Within the Existing Litigation Framework for Combating Actions by...

There is much debate over how to curtail patent litigation by non-practicing entities (“NPEs”). A NPE (sometimes referred to as a “Patent Troll”) is an individual or entity who typically accumulates patents not for the...more

President and Fellows of Harvard College v. Lee (Fed. Cir. 2014)

One of the most iconic inventions of the biotechnology era is the "Harvard Oncomouse" invented by Philip Leder and Timothy Stewart in the early 1980's. One of the first transgenic mice transformed with DNA encoding something...more

Counsel May Confer with a Witness Between Cross-Examination and Re-Cross, but the Witness Might Be Re-Crossed on the Substance of...

Organik Kimya AS v. Rohm and Haas Co. - In an order regarding allowable communications between counsel and witness, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) held that counsel may confer with a witness between the end...more

The PTAB Authorizes the Patent Owner to File Its Motion for Leave to Take Discovery of General Electric on Possible Privity with a...

In General Electric Co. v. Transdata, Inc., the patent owner requested authorization to file a motion for leave to take discovery of petitioner General Electric regarding whether GE is in privity with a defendant in...more

A Sea Change after Alice: Recent Court Decisions Show Patents Are Vulnerable under Section 101 Attack

Since 2010, the Supreme Court has issued four decisions on patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In the most recent decision, Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, the Court continued the restrictive approach set forth in...more

Petitioner Barred from Raising Arguments Not in Petition

TRW Automotive US LLC v. Magna Elecs., Inc. - Addressing the petitioner’s request for rehearing of a denial for review, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB, the Board) denied the...more

The Pitfalls Of Incorporation By Reference And Numerous Arguments In Inter Partes Review

The Leahy-Smith American Invents Act provides post-grant procedures for challenging the validity of a granted patent before a panel of administrative law judges from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”). The United...more

District Court Precludes Admission of Inter Partes Review Proceedings in Front of Jury But Permits Consideration as part of...

In this patent infringement action between Ultratec, Inc. ("Ultratec") and Sorenson Communications, Inc. ("Sorenson"), Sorenson sought to admit evidence of an inter partes review proceeding of the patent-in-suit. Sorenson...more

Ropes & Gray: Advantages of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board [Video]

There are arguments that you could never present and win effectively in a jury trial that you can present at the U.S Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The board has rocketed to a very leading role even in this first year...more

Federal Circuit Review | October 2014

Inequitable Conduct Ruling Upheld - In AMERICAN CALCAR, INC. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., Appeal No. 2013-1061, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of inequitable conduct. Calcar asserted patents related to...more

Court Crushes Krush’s Motions for Preliminary Injunction on Patent Infringement and Trade Secret Misappropriation

Krush Communications, LLC (“Krush”) brought suit in New Jersey in 2013 against Lunex Telecom, Inc., a Georgia corporation (“Lunex”), for patent infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets. ...more

PTAB Requires the Patent Owner to Attend Oral Argument

In Butamax Advanced Biofuels, LLC v. Gevo, Inc., the patent owner requested permission to be excused from the oral hearing. The patent owner cited the expense of having counsel prepare for and attend the hearing. Instead, the...more

FTC v. Cephalon, Inc.

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The issue in this case is not whether the validity of the ’516 patent should be litigated in the antitrust trial, but rather, how the court’s previous finding of invalidity and...more

Dissents and Concurrences Popping up in IPR Proceedings

The PTAB has been remarkably consistent to date in its decisions regarding the variety of issues in inter partes review practice. Issues both simple and complex have typically been resolved by one panel and future panels,...more

You Can’t Judge a Book By Its Cover: When Are Domestic Negotiations a “Sale” or “Offer to Sell”?

In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 2013-1472, - 1656 (October 22, 2014), the Federal Circuit concluded that there was no direct infringement when substantial activities of a sales transaction – including...more

IP Newsflash - October 2014 #4

U.S.I.T.C. May Not Issue Exclusionary Order Due to Induced Infringement When Direct Infringement Occurs Only After Importation - In a panel decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a United...more

Oral Argument In Teva Pharmaceuticals: Supreme Court To Decide Federal Circuit’s Standard Of Review Of District Court Claim...

On October 15, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (No. 13-854). The issue presented in the case is “Whether a district court’s factual finding in support of its...more

Takeda Pharm. Co., Ltd. v. Mylan Inc.

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: The issue here concerns whether the owner of a pharmaceutical patent may simultaneously assert a claim for infringement under § 271(e)(2), and a claim pursuant to the Declaratory...more

Post-Grant Insights: The Significance of a Three-Judge Panel [Video]

The three-judge panels at the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) are something that we've never seen before in this country. The feeling that our clients are getting a fair and careful read from this really experienced...more

Standard for Induced Patent Infringement in Flux

Recent developments in a court case concerning induced patent infringement may have a significant impact on patent owners and patent portfolio valuations, pending review by the Supreme Court. On October 16, 2014, the...more

Depomed, Inc. v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC

Nature of the Case and Issue(s) Presented: Depomed sued Actavis for infringing seven patents related to a dosage form capable of being retained in the stomach, allowing for the delayed-release of gabapentin in the small...more

Surviving Inter Partes Review: Good Experts Are Key

Inter partes review and covered business method review (collectively IPR) proceedings have now settled in as a new strategic tool for invalidating asserted patents. The early cases that have worked through to a final written...more

IP|Trend: The Importance of Consumer Surveys in Patent Litigation [Video]

Courts have increasingly shown scrutiny towards claims of patent damages in patent litigation. To address these issues patent plaintiffs have often relied on consumer surveys to demonstrate harm caused by patent infringement....more

E.D. Texas court grants stay of litigation pending an IPR based, in part, on patent owner's failure to timely respond to the stay...

In Norman IP Holdings v. TP-Link Technologies, Co., et al., the Defendants moved to stay the litigation pending completion of an inter partes review involving the patents-in-suit. The plaintiff did not respond to the motion....more

900 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 36