News & Analysis as of

Sprint

Federal Circuit Review | April 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more

CFPB and DOJ file submissions opposing state AGs’ proposal to redirect unused settlement funds to NAAG

by Ballard Spahr LLP on

We previously reported that the Connecticut Attorney General, on behalf of the Attorneys General of Indiana, Kansas and Vermont, (the “state AGs”) had filed a joint motion to intervene in a CFPB enforcement action against...more

Settlement Agreement May Be Used as Evidence of Damages

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing evidentiary issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that a settlement agreement related to the patent at issue is admissible as proof of a reasonable royalty. Prism...more

No Abuse of Discretion in Awarding Prejudgment Interest Based in Part on Patents Not Yet Issued at the Time of Hypothetical...

In Comcast IP Holdings I LLC v. Sprint Communications Co., L.P., No. 2015-1992 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 7, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict that Sprint infringed patents owned by Comcast and a $7.5 million damages...more

CFPB Ordered by a New York Federal Court to "Show Me the Money"

by Clark Hill PLC on

Since the birth of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB" or "Bureau") well over 150 Consent Orders have been entered against every sector of the financial services industry. Many of these Consent Orders came with a...more

Federal Circuit Finds No Abuse of Discretion in Trial Court’s Refusal to Exclude Plaintiff’s Settlement Agreement with Defendant’s...

In Prism Technologies LLC v. Sprint Spectrum L.P, Nos. 16-1456, -1457 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s denial of Sprint’s motion for a new trial based on, among other things, the...more

Complaints About Claim Construction Irrelevant Without a Showing of How it Would Make a Difference

In Comcast IP Holdings I LLC v. Sprint Communications Company LP, [2015-1992] (March 7, 2017) the Federal Circuit affirmed a $7.5 million dollar award for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,170,008, 7,012,916 and 8,204,046...more

NYC Administrative Law Judge Determines Long Distance Telecommunications Service Fees Exempt from Utility Tax

On December 29, 2016, a New York City administrative law judge (ALJ) determined that Sprint’s long distance telecommunications service fees were exempt from the City’s Utility Tax. The ALJ concluded that the Utility Tax...more

State AGs seek to intervene in CFPB enforcement action to modify settlement terms

by Ballard Spahr LLP on

The Attorneys General for the states of Connecticut, Indiana, Kansas, and Vermont recently took the unusual step of filing a joint motion to intervene to modify the settlement terms of a CFPB enforcement action....more

Point of Novelty Enters Indefiniteness Analysis

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sprint Communication Co., Case No. 16-1013 (Fed. Cir., Sept. 23, 2016) (Prost, CJ) (Newman, J, dissenting). Sprint sued Cox for patent infringement, asserting several patents directed to...more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - September 2016

by WilmerHale on

Husky Injection Molding System v. Athena Automation Ltd. (No. 2015-1726, 9/23/16) (Lourie, Plager, Stoll) - Lourie, J. Dismissing an appeal from a PTAB decision in an IPR for lack of jurisdiction. “[W]e conclude that we...more

A Split Panel of the Federal Circuit Debates the Standards for Definiteness

by BakerHostetler on

In Cox Communications, Inc. v. Sprint Communications Co. LP, Appeal No. 2016-1013 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 23, 2016), the panel, consisting of Chief Judge Prost (authoring the opinion) and Judges Newman and Bryson, unanimously...more

“Processing System” Does Not Render Claims Indefinite

The Federal Circuit relied on Nautilus to preserve functional language of a method claim in a decision published last Friday. In Cox Comm, Inc. v. Sprint, No. 2016-1013, the Federal Circuit held that the term “processing...more

Sprint v. Comcast: District Court Denies Request for Attorney's Fees Pending Appeal to the Federal Circuit

Plaintiff Sprint Communications Company brought suit against Defendants Comcast Cable Communications, LLC and Comcast IP Phone, LLC alleging infringement of six of its patents related to telecommunications and data...more

Sprint FCA Case Denied Certiorari by U.S. Supreme Court

by Reed Smith on

On May 31, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in a challenge by Sprint Nextel Corp. (“Sprint”) to a False Claims Act (“FCA”) lawsuit by New York state against it for sales taxes not collected and remitted on...more

Federal Circuit Review | May 2016

by Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Construes Claim Term in a Manner that Rendered Claim Language Superfluous - In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Commc’ns AB, Appeal No. 2015-1251, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s...more

Sprint Communications Inc. Asks the U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Bundling Issue

by Alston & Bird on

On February 18, 2016, Sprint Communications Inc. filed a petition for a writ of certiorari asking the United States Supreme Court to review the New York Court of Appeals’ denial of Sprint’s attempt to dismiss the...more

Equitable Estoppel Stops NPE From Asserting Patents that its Assignor Failed to Assert

In High Point SARL v. Sprint Nextel Corporation, [2015-1298] (April 5, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment that equitable estoppel and laches preclude prosecution of High Point’s claims for infringement of...more

Claims Are Construed In Electronic Communications Case

by Morris James LLP on

Cox Communications Inc., et al. v. Sprint Communications Company, L.P., et al., C.A. No. 12- 487-SLR, March 21, 2016. Robinson, J. Claim construction opinion issues regarding 43 terms from five patents....more

Cisco v. Sprint: Declaratory Judgment Action Dismissed Where Cisco Could Not Show Case or Controversy Based on Suits Against...

Plaintiff Cisco Systems, Inc. ("Cisco") filed two declaratory judgment actions against Sprint seeking to invalidate six Sprint patents and seeking a declaration of non-infringement of seven Sprint patents. Cisco is a...more

Declaratory Judgment Action Is Dismissed For Lack Of Subject Matter Jurisdiction

by Morris James LLP on

Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is granted. This is a declaratory judgment action. Defendant has asserted infringement against various customers of plaintiff on their...more

Nominative Fair Use, as Illustrated by Colorful Balls

If you watch any amount of T.V. or happened to catch either of the AFC or NFC Championship games last weekend, you’ve probably seen one of the recent cell phone carrier ball commercials....more

District Court Denies Accounting and Ongoing Royalty Where Jury Instructions Told Jury to Award Damages That Would Put Patent...

Prism brought suit against Sprint alleging patent infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,127,345 and 8,387,155 (the "Asserted Patents"). After the jury returned a $30 million award in favor of Prism, Prism filed a motion for an...more

Sprint Agrees to Pay FTC $2.95M Penalty to Settle FCRA Allegations

by Faegre Baker Daniels on

On October 21, 2015, the Federal Trade Commission announced an agreement with Sprint to resolve allegations that Sprint violated disclosure requirements of the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). Sprint will pay $2.95 million...more

Sprint Agrees to Pay FTC $2.95 Million to Settle Risk-Based Pricing Rule Charges Under the FCRA

by Davis Wright Tremaine LLP on

Mobile service providers frequently look at their customers’ credit reports and scores to determine the best pricing plans for those customers. But asa recent settlement between Sprint Corporation and the Federal Trade...more

53 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3
Cybersecurity

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*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.