Patents › Infringement

ITC Section 337 Update - May 15, 2013

Federal Circuit Affirms Commission Determination That Litigation Activities Unrelated To Licensing Do Not Satisfy Domestic Industry – On May 13, 2013, the Federal Circuit affirmed a January 2012 Commission determination that...more

Court Report -- May 19, 2013

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. AbbVie Inc. v. Hetero USA Inc. et al. 1:13-cv-00852; filed May 15, 2013 in the District Court of Delaware - •...more

Court Report Supplement -- May 16, 2013

About Court Report Supplement: Periodically, we will report on biotech and pharma cases that were inadvertently omitted from our Court Report column. Tawnsaura Group, LLC v. Direct Digital, LLCL: 8:13-cv-00004; filed...more

CLS Bank: A Deeply Divided En Banc Federal Circuit Fails to Rule When Computer Claims are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

On May 10, 2013, the en banc Federal Circuit issued its highly anticipated decision in CLS Bank Int’l v. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd., No. 2011-1301, concerning whether computer-implemented method and system claims are patent...more

CLS Bank Int'l v. Alice Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2013) (en banc) -- Judge Lourie's Concurrence

On May 10, the Federal Circuit handed down a much anticipated en banc ruling regarding the patent eligibility of computer-implemented inventions under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In a per curiam opinion that is perhaps the most...more

Supreme Court Rules in Patent Exhaustion Case: Farmer’s Use of Second Generation Seed Constitutes Infringement

On May 13, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that patent exhaustion does not bar an infringement claim in a case involving a farmer who reproduced patented seeds by planting and harvesting second generation seeds...more

Supreme Court Finds for Monsanto in Seed Harvesting Case

In Bowman v. Monsanto Co., the Supreme Court held that the doctrine of patent exhaustion does not give a farmer who has bought patented seeds the right to “reproduce” them through planting and harvesting without the patent...more

Don’t Blame the Bean: The Monsanto Patent Decision

In the case of Bowman v. Monsanto Company (May 13, 2013), the US Supreme Court has weighed into this thorny field, and on Monday it delivered a unanimous judgment upholding the rights in Monsanto’s patented soybeans. (See our...more

U.S. Supreme Court Qualifies Patent Exhaustion

On May 13, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court, in the case of Bowman v. Monsanto, decided whether a soybean farmer infringed Monsanto’s patent by replanting patented soybeans harvested from previous crops. The Court unanimously...more

Publications Patent Exhaustion Does Not Apply to the Reproduction of Patented Seeds

On May 13, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Bowman v. Monsanto Co., 569 U.S. ___ (2013), which concerned whether and how patent exhaustion applies to self-replicating patented articles. Monsanto...more

Bowman v. Monsanto: Self-Replicating Biotech and Software Left at the Alter?

Today, in a case having the potential to upset the agricultural biotech industry, Justice Elena Kagan delivered the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous decision rejecting farmer Vernon Hugh Bowman’s patent exhaustion defense....more

Legal Alert: Monsanto Ruling Protects Innovators of Self-Replicating Biotechnology

On May 13, 2013, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held in Monsan to v. Bowman that the doctrine of patent exhaustion does not permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds for planting and harvesting without the patent holder's...more

If Patented Technology Can Copy Itself, When Do Patent Rights Cease?

Patent rights in a patented self-replicating technology, such as seeds, continue until the patent term is ended and not before. On May 13, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Bowman v. Monsanto that the patent rights in seeds are...more

Patent Exhaustion Doctrine Does Not Protect Farmers Who Replant Patented Seeds

In a brief, unanimous opinion written by Justice Kagan, the Supreme Court yesterday agreed with Monsanto that the patent exhaustion doctrine does not enable farmers to replant and reproduce patented seeds without the...more

Patent Watch: Bowman v. Monsanto Co.

On May 13, 2013, in Bowman v. Monsanto Co., the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Federal Circuit's affirmance of the district court's judgment that Bowman infringed U.S. Patents No. 5,352,605 and No. RE39,247, which related to...more

Bowman v. Monsanto: Crisis Averted on IP Protection for Self-Replicating Technologies

Life science companies in general (and seed companies in particular) are breathing a sigh of relief following the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday in Bowman v. Monsanto. As Bowman wended its way through district...more

Bowman v. Monsanto Co. (2013)

Today, in Bowman v. Monsanto Co., the Supreme Court determined that the doctrine of patent exhaustion did not permit a farmer who buys patented seeds to repro­duce them through planting and harvesting without the patent...more

Intellectual Property and Your Startup (Presentation)

Knobbe Martens’ patent attorneys Russell Jeide and Scott Cromar hosted a seminar series on intellectual property basics for Temecula’s business community. This presentation is from the first class giving a basic overview of...more

Bowman v. Monsanto

Supreme Court Ruling on Patent Rights of Self-Replicating Technology

Full text copy of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Bowman v. Monsanto Co. et al that Monsanto’s patent rights extend to future generations of its patented seeds. From Joe Barnes at the Washington Post: “Farmers must pay...more

Supreme Court Decides Bowman v. Monsanto

The Supreme Court handed down a unanimous decision today in Bowman v. Monsanto, holding the doctrine of patent exhaustion does not permit a farmer to reproduce patented seeds by replanting seeds after growing a first crop....more

Patent Watch: Baron Servs., Inc. v. Media Weather Innovations, LLC

On May 7, 2013, in Baron Servs., Inc. v. Media Weather Innovations, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dyk, Reyna, Prost*) vacated and remanded the district court's summary judgment that MWI did not...more

DISPUTE RESOLUTION: Intellectual Property: Non-Practicing Entities (Patent Trolls) Target Oil and Gas Companies

As the number of patent infringement lawsuits brought by Non-Practicing Entities (NPEs) has increased, oil and gas companies have increasingly become targets....more

Don’t Be Bullied by a Patent Troll

One of our favorite stories growing up was the “Three Billy Goats Gruff,” the main character of which is a terrible troll who lived under a bridge. The troll tried to terrorize and eat three goats who just wanted to cross a...more

An arbitration award may not be the end of the road in patent disputes - Several cases serve as examples to the contrary

When a patent dispute goes to arbitration, there is the possibility that an outside party could try to influence the outcome by going to court. This may come as a surprise, given that Section 294 of the Patent Act specifies...more

Do Patents Control Self-Replicating Technologies? Supreme Court Hears Argument that Sale of Patented Seed Exhausts Future Patent

Patent infringement arises when one “makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells” a patented invention without authority from the patent holder. However, once the first authorized sale of the patented product has occurred, the...more