Supreme Court of the United States Patents

The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary... more +
The United States Supreme Court is the highest court of the United States and is charged with interpreting federal law, including the United States Constitution. The Court's docket is largely discretionary with only a limited number of cases granted review each term.  The Court is comprised of one chief justice and eight associate justices, who are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate to hold lifetime positions. less -
News & Analysis as of

USPTO Issues July 2015 Updated Guidance on Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis

On July 30, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued updated guidance regarding subject matter eligibility analysis to address six major themes from comments received in response to the 2014 Interim...more

ANDA Update - July 2015

Supreme Court Holds Good Faith Belief of Patent Invalidity Is Not a Defense to Induced Infringement - Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (Supr. Ct. May 26, 2015): Pharmaceutical patents commonly include...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Defendant’s Belief a Patent Was Invalid Is Not a Defense to an Induced Infringement Claim

Addressing a syllogistic, perhaps paradoxical difference between belief of non-infringement and belief of invalidity, on May 26, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. held that an accused...more

Revisiting Patent Opinions of Counsel on Induced Infringement

Experienced business owners are usually aware of the need to carefully review their business operations for potential intellectual property issues. Indeed, the threat of a patent infringement lawsuit is a possibility for...more

Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc.

Case Name: Shire Development, LLC v. Watson Pharms., Inc., 787 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2015) (Circuit Judges Prost, Chen, and Hughes presiding; Opinion by Hughes, J.) (Appeal from S.D. Fla., Middlebrooks, J.) - Drug...more

Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., v. Sandoz, Inc.

Case Name: Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., v. Sandoz, Inc., Fed. Cir. Nos. 2012-1567, -1568, -1569, -1570, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 10229 (Fed. Cir. June 18, 2015) (Circuit Judges Moore, Mayer, and Wallach presiding; Opinion by Moore,...more

Don’t Get Personal

Xilinx, Inc. v. Papst Licensing GMBH & Co. KG (Judge Lucy Koh) (July 9, 2015) - The Supreme Court’s 2014 ruling in Daimler v. Bauman raised the bar to establish personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Daimler has made it...more

A Win for Licensees: Royalty Payments Stop at Patent’s Expiration

On June 22, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that if a patent holder’s invention was properly filed and approved by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, then the patent holder is granted a term of twenty (20)...more

The “Oracle” Predicts It: Supreme Court Declines to Hear Landmark Software Copyright Case

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to grant certiorari in the case of Google, Inc. v. Oracle America, Inc., a closely watched case regarding the eligibility of software for copyright protection. The Supreme Court’s decision...more

Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Section 18 of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) established a transitional program through which the USPTO conducts post-grant reviews of covered business method (CBM) patents. For the most part, § 18 incorporates...more

Patent Defeats Antitrust in Latest Test at Supreme Court

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, 576 U.S. ____ (2015), the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether to overturn Brulotte v. Thys, 379 U.S. 29 (1964), its 1964 decision holding that it was per se unlawful for a patent owner to...more

Check Your Technology License: Payments May Be Unenforceable

Expiration of a patent also terminates the rights to collect royalties on that patent – even if a license contract says otherwise. All businesses are reminded to check the termination date of any patent licensed to the...more

No Rehearing En Banc for In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies -- PTAB Update

Earlier this week, the Federal Circuit issued an order denying a petition for rehearing en banc in the In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC case. As we have previously reported, this case was the first appeal of the first...more

The Supreme Court Again Rejects Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, No. 13-720 (U.S. June 22, 2015), the Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision with Justice Kagan writing for the majority, upheld its 1964 decision in Brulotte v. Thys, 379 U.S. 29, reaffirming...more

First Federal Appellate Court Holds a NonCash Reverse Payment Subject to Antitrust Scrutiny: Is the Third Circuit's Decision in...

Recently, the Third Circuit issued the first federal appellate decision interpreting the Supreme Court's landmark decision in FTC v. Actavis, Inc.[1], potentially greatly expanding the scope of settling parties in reverse...more

U.S. Supreme Court Holds Patent Holders Can’t Charge Royalties After Patent Expires

In a decision issued June 22, 2015 — Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC — the United States Supreme Court reaffirmed and declined to overrule long-standing precedent holding that a patent holder cannot charge royalties for...more

IP Newsletter - July 2015

In This Issue: - En Banc Federal Circuit Abandons “Strong” Presumption That a Limitation Is Not Subject to 35 U.S.C. § 112, Paragraph 6 - Supreme Court Rejects Belief of Invalidity Defense for Inducement in Commil...more

Law on Post-Patent Royalties Differs Between Canada and the U.S.

The recent decision of the United States Supreme Court (USSC) in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment LLC (Kimble) highlights how a lack of knowledge of the law governing the intellectual property that is the subject of a...more

Elimination of Rule 84 and Form 18 Could Increase Pleading Standards in Patent Cases

In an order issued in late April of this year, the U.S. Supreme Court, without comment, adopted changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure that were approved in September by the Judicial Conference of the United States....more

How Not to Get Snared in Brulotte’s Web

The Supreme Court’s Kimble Decision Reminds Licensors and Licensees to Evaluate Post-Expiration Royalties with Care - On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court, in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, declined to overrule–on...more

Everything Old is New Again: Post-Expiration Patent Royalties are a Bad Idea!

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court upheld the longstanding case law that prohibits a patent owner from receiving royalties after a patent has expired. In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC (June 22, 2015) 2015 U.S....more

Corporate E-Note - June 2015

In this Issue: - IRS Issues Guidance on Portability: The IRS recently issued final regulations that provide guidance on the federal estate and gift tax applicable exclusion amount, in general, as well as the...more

Supreme Court Update: Horne V. Dep't Of Agriculture (14-275), Kimble V. Marvel Entertainment (13-720), Patel V. City Of Los...

Raisins, radioactive wrists, Red Roof registries, and reformatory roughhousing were all on the Court's radar Monday (it's a very broad radar horizon), as it issued decisions in Horne v. Dep't of Agriculture (14-275), holding...more

How a Trade Secret Could Have Saved a Running Royalty From a Nearly Invincible Law

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, just handed down June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court reaffirmed the 50 year old holding of Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U. S. 29 (1964), that patent royalties cannot extend beyond the...more

Kimble v. Marvel: Supreme Court affirms unenforceability of contract provisions that run royalties beyond patent’s term: 3...

The Supreme Court this week upheld a long-standing precedent that restricts the ability of a patent holder to charge a royalty beyond the term of a patent. In a 6-3 decision, the court in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment...more

748 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 30

"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*

*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.
×