Federal Circuit Summary -
Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Courts should not give too much weight to evidence purporting to show a lack of actual confusion...more
9/12/2018
/ Affidavits ,
Appeals ,
Consumer Confusion ,
DuPont Factors ,
Ex Parte ,
Goods or Services ,
Reaffirmation ,
Substantial Evidence ,
Substantially Similar ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before O’Malley, Mayer, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Claims may be rejected under 35 § U.S.C. 103 based on implicit disclosures of a prior art reference....more
9/11/2018
/ Appeals ,
Apple ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reaffirmation ,
Samsung ,
Section 103 ,
Software Patents ,
Substantial Evidence Standard
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Prost, Dyk, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent and Trial Appeal Board.
Summary: An IPR petitioner lacks standing to appeal an adverse decision by the Board if it sells no infringing...more
8/8/2018
/ Appeals ,
Article III ,
Injury-in-Fact ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Noninfringement ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Standing
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Frost, Newman, and Lawrie. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
Summary: A weak showing of secondary considerations is insufficient to create a genuine...more
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Prost, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts
Summary: A patent claim having multiple permutations is only enabled if each and...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Lourie, Dyk, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California
Summary: (1) The public use bar is not triggered by experimental use...more
7/13/2018
/ Appeals ,
Enhanced Damages ,
Experimental Use Exception ,
Jury Trial ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Validity ,
Patents ,
Public Use ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Willful Infringement
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Newman, Dyk, and Chen. Appeal from the District of Colorado.
Summary: (1) The Federal Circuit’s separate affirmance of a PTAB decision that a patent in suit is invalid renders an...more
5/31/2018
/ Appeals ,
Calculation of Damages ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Concurrent Litigation ,
Jury Verdicts ,
Mootness ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Royalties ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-in-Suit ,
Patents
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Moore, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of North Dakota.
Summary: A district court must articulate a reasonable basis for denying...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Prost, Reyna, and Wallach. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas.
Summary: Pre-reexamination conduct cannot be a basis for equitable...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Dyk, O’Malley, and Wallach. Appeal from the PTAB.
Summary: A priority claim must be explicitly stated in the patent and cannot be incorporated by reference from an earlier patent. ...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Lourie, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A prima facie case of obviousness is established where the claimed range abuts a range disclosed in...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before O’Malley, Plager and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Judge William H. Alsup.
Summary: Historical findings of fact relevant to...more
3/30/2018
/ Appeals ,
Copyright ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Damages ,
Fair Use ,
Google ,
JMOL ,
Jury Trial ,
Oracle ,
Oracle v Google ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Standard of Review ,
Transformative Use
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Moore, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the Middle District of Florida.
Summary: Allegations in the complaint about how the claimed invention solved problems in...more
2/22/2018
/ Appeals ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Leave to Amend ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Section 101 ,
Triable Issue of Fact
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Moore, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: In a product-by-process claim, terms that can be equally understood as structural or process...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Moore, Taranto, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Summary: (1) Terms of degree, including “minimal,” may render claims...more
2/14/2018
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Appeals ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Indefiniteness ,
Motion for Summary Judgment ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Question of Law ,
Remand ,
Section 101
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Prost, Renya, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A patent owner cannot retroactively bring a continuation-in-part patent within the scope of § 121...more
En banc, Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: The Federal Circuit can review the Board’s decision whether an IPR is time barred under § 315(b)....more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Wallach, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Even if a patentee’s initial complaint was reasonable, the patentee can...more
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before PROST, WALLACH, and TARANTO. Appeal from the District of Delaware Summary: (1) A party may not avoid inducement based on “substantial non-infringing uses,” and (2) prosecution history...more
11/22/2017
/ Appeals ,
Estoppel ,
Inducement ,
Parent Patents ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Prosecution ,
Patent-in-Suit ,
Patents ,
Product Labels ,
Prosecution History Estoppel ,
Sandoz ,
Sanofi ,
Sanofi-Aventis
Judgments and Awards -
On September 25, 2017, a federal court in San Jose, CA awarded the Defendants Google, YouTube, and On2 Technologies $820,321.41 in attorney’s fees. The Court previously held the Plaintiff Max Sound...more
The Federal Circuit held that a rat study in a provisional application and a conversion method in an uncited reference did not support the claimed human dosage form in Los Angeles Biomed. Research Inst. v. Eli Lilly & Co.,...more