Summary Judgment Patents

News & Analysis as of

Claims for a New Abstract Idea are Still Claims to an Abstract Idea, Invalid under §101

In Synopsis, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corporation, [2015-1599] (October 17, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment that claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,530,841; 5,680,318; and 5,748,488 were invalid under 35 U.S.C....more

Federal Circuit Relies on Robust Disclosure to Save Priority Date

On September 20, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion affirming the summary judgement that Abbott’s U.S. Patent No. 5,344,915 (“the ’915 Patent”) was sufficiently supported by the written...more

Federal Circuit Review | September 2016

Claims Directed to Monitoring and Analyzing Data Held to Be Invalid under § 101 - In Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A., Appeal No. 2015-1778, the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s grant of summary...more

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

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

Zak v. Facebook, Inc. (E.D. Mich. 2016) - Software Patent Found to Be Directed to Abstract Idea, But Survives § 101 Challenge with...

Bruce Zak, an individual, sued Facebook, Inc. for patent infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on two of his software patents -- United States Patent Nos. 8,713,134 and 9,141,720. ...more

Prior Art Take 2: Finjan and Sophos Gear up for a Second Battle on Whether Prior Art Was Publicly Available

Order Denying Finjan, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment, Finjan, Inc. v. Sophos, Inc., Case No. 14-cv-1197 (Judge William Orrick) In a battle that likely felt like déjà vu for the parties, Finjan for the second time...more

Federal Circuit Review | August 2016

Federal Circuit Holds That Using A Contract Manufacturer Does Not Trigger An On-Sale Bar - In The Medicines Co. v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, -1504, the Federal Circuit, en banc, held that the patentee’s deal...more

Oxford Immunotec Ltd. v. Qiagen, Inc. (D. Mass. 2016)

Magistrate Recommends That Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Be Allowed for Kit Claims and Denied for Method Claims - Last month, in Oxford Immunotec Ltd. v. Qiagen, Inc., Magistrate Judge Donald L. Cabell of the U.S....more

Indirect Infringement Not Overcome by Objective Strength of Non-Infringement Case

Addressing indirect infringement and claim construction issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court on three of the four patents at issue, finding that it applied the wrong standard for...more

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2016)

Core Wireless Licensing brought an action against LG Electronics in the Eastern District of Texas. Core contended that LG infringed claim 21 of its U.S. Patent No. 7,804,850. LG moved for summary judgment on the grounds...more

Summary judgment is denied due to factual disputes

Stark, C. J. Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of infringement is denied. Defendant’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement is denied. Oral argument took place on August 17, 2016....more

Federal Circuit Finds Life Sciences Subject Matter Patent Eligible

On July 5, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued an opinion vacating the summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent No. 7,604,929 (“the ’929 Patent”) and sent the case back to the District Court...more

Sale and Offer for Sale Determined by Where “Substantial Activities of the Sales Transactions” Occur

In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., [2013-1472, 2013-1656](August 5, 2016), on remand from the Supreme Court, which held that 35 USC 284 gives district courts the discretion to award enhanced damages in...more

Patent Drafters: Leaving Coining to the Mint

In Advanced Ground Information Systems, Inc. v. Life360, Inc., [2015-1732] (July 28, 2016) the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,031,728 and 7,672,681 for indefiniteness....more

Information is Intangible, so Methods of Manipulating it are Abstract

In Electric Power Group, LLC, v. Alstom S.A., [2015-1778] (August 1, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of invalidity of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,233,843, 8,060,259, and 8,401,710, on systems and methods for...more

Resolution Of Laches Defense Is Left For Trial

Stark, C. J. Defendants’ objections to the magistrate’s report and recommendation are overruled. The magistrate earlier recommended finding that defendants’ motion for summary judgment of laches be denied....more

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - July 2016 #2

WBIP, LLC v. Kohler Co. (No. 2015-1038, -1044, 7/19/16) (Moore, O'Malley, Chen) - Moore, J. Affirming denial of JMOL that patent was invalid as obvious and lacked an adequate written description, affirming finding of...more

ANDA Update - Volume 2, Number 2

180-Day Notice Period for Biosimilar Approval Is Always Mandatory and Enforceable by Injunction - Amgen Inc., v. Apotex Inc., (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2016) - A year after analyzing the patent dance and notice...more

Binding Claim Construction Rulings Pre- Teva Vs. Post -Teva

In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that clear error review applies to factual determinations underlying district court claim constructions. There has been much discussion about the...more

Federal Circuit Offers Path Through Section 101 Thicket for Biotech Method Patents

In its July 5, 2016 decision in Rapid Litigation Management Ltd and In Vitro, Inc. v. CellzDirect, Inc. and Invitrogen Corp., the Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to an improved method of cryopreserving...more

Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. v. Cellzdirect, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

As we have had the occasion to say before regarding subject matter eligibility, "[o]ne swallow does not a summer make, nor one fine day . . . ," but the Federal Circuit may have engendered a glimmer of hope that it will once...more

When Distinguishing Statements May Be Considered Disclaimers of Claim Scope

Addressing disclaimer of claim scope, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment of non-infringement, finding that the patentee clearly and unmistakably disclaimed...more

Intrinsic Feature in All Described Embodiments Makes Claim Insurmountable **WEB ONLY**

Addressing issues of claim construction, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court, finding that that no reasonable juror could find infringement where none of the accused products contained...more

Look to Specification to Interpret Facially Unclear Claims

Addressing claim construction issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reiterated the necessity of reading claims in the context of the written description when they are not clear on their face. Howmedica...more

Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2016) - Continuation Application Filed on Same Day Parent Issues Satisfies § 120...

Last week, in Immersion Corp. v. HTC Corp., the Federal Circuit reversed the decision of the District Court for the District of Delaware that U.S. Patent No. 7,148,875 ("the '875 patent"), assigned to Immersion Corp....more

141 Results
View per page
Page: of 6
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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*

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

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.