Latest Posts › Patent Litigation

Share:

Claims Obvious Despite Contrary Jury Verdict - ABT Systems, LLC v. Emerson Electric Co.

Addressing the issue of obviousness, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned the jury verdict of non-obviousness and focusing on the nature of the problem to be solved, concluded that the asserted claims...more

Steps that Simply Map Out an Application on a Computer Do Not Confer Patent Eligibility - Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Capital...

Again addressing the issue of subject-matter eligibility of computer-implemented claims, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found two patents to be directed to non-eligible subject matter, concluding that the...more

No En Banc Review of Panel Decision Vacating a Civil Contempt Remedye - Plus, Inc. v. Lawson Software, Inc.

Addressing the issue of contempt for violation of a non-final injunction, a divided U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to rehear en banc a panel decision that vacated a civil contempt holding for violation...more

Only Basic Functions of a Processor Avoid Need for Disclosed Algorithm - EON Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC

Addressing the question of what corresponding structure must be disclosed to support a means-plus-function claim element, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court finding that eight...more

Stays of Litigation Warranted Even When the CBM Review Does Not Address All Asserted Claims or All Invalidity Defenses

Versata Software, Inc. v. Callidus Software, Inc. - Addressing the denial of a stay pending the covered business method (CBM) review of some, but not all, asserted claims in a district court action, the U.S. Court of...more

Claims Directed to a Mental Task Are Abstract, but Computerizing an Old Practice Is Not

Cambridge Assocs., LLC v. Capital Dynamics; PNC Bank et al. v. Secure Axcess - Addressing the issue of patent-eligible subject matter for covered business method (CBM) patents, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office...more

Injunction and Civil Contempt Remedy Vacated After PTO Cancels Claim in Reexamination

ePlus, Inc. v. Lawson Software, Inc. - Addressing whether an injunction and civil contempt were proper after the sole claim on which the injunction was based was cancelled, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Voluntary and Intentional Applicant Choices are Errors Under the Reissue Statute Only if They Arise from a False or Deficient...

In re Dinsmore - Addressing the issue of whether the filing of a terminal disclaimer that rendered a patent unenforceable by the applicants was an error for the purposes of the reissue statute, the U.S. Court of...more

General Conclusions About Basic Knowledge or Common Sense Are Insufficient for Core Factual Findings

K/S HIMPP v. Hear-Wear Techs., LLC - Addressing whether the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) properly refused to reject as obvious a claim calling for a multi-prong electrical connection, the U.S. Court of...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 11, November 2013

Appellate Decision Sets Stage for Next Skirmish In The Apple vs. Samsung Smart Phone Wars - A unanimous panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has concluded that the district court was within its...more

IP Update, Vol. 16, No. 10, October 2013

No Case or Controversy in DJ Against Patentee Who Sued Manufacturer’s Customers: Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Alberta Telecommunications Research Center - In a non-precedential opinion addressing declaratory judgment...more

36 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

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