The United States Supreme Court denied certiorari in the closely observed case American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc., v. Neapco Holdings LLC. The Court’s refusal to hear the case disappointed patent practitioners nationwide—and...more
In two recent decisions, both issued on February 4, 2022, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “CAFC”) erased two huge patent damages awards because the underlying expert opinion on damages was...more
On December 18, 2019, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in Fox Factory v. SRAM, Nos. 2018-2024 and 2018-2025, reversed the Board’s Final Written Decision in a pair of inter partes reviews (“IPRs”)...more
On December 5, 2019, Judge David C. Godbey of the Northern District of Texas denied the defendant Diebold Nixdorf, Inc.’s (“Diebold”) motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), in Nautilus Hyosung Inc. v. Diebold, Inc. et al.,...more
12/19/2019
/ Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) ,
Amended Complaints ,
Appeals ,
Cease and Desist Orders ,
Claim Construction ,
Exclusion Orders ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Means-Plus-Function ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 337
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) recently issued a precedential opinion finding that a lower court had improperly incorporated an embodiment from the specification of the asserted patents into the claims....more
In Vecco Instruments Inc. v. SGL Carbon, LLC, No. 17-CV-2217 (E.D.N.Y. Nov. 2, 2017), Judge Pamela Chen in the Eastern District of New York recently granted Vecco’s motion for a preliminary injunction enjoining SGL Carbon....more
The United States Supreme Court decided earlier this year that a 1957 opinion is still valid and still limits venue choices for patent infringement actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1400. See TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group...more
After an eight-year battle through the Federal Courts, the fight over attorneys’ fees in Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness has likely reached its end with the Federal Circuit upholding the hotly disputed $1.6 million...more
9/19/2017
/ Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Determination on Remand ,
Exceptional Case ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Reaffirmation ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Totality of Circumstances Test
In a move that could drastically change the patent law landscape, the United States Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group LLC, No. 16-712, to answer the question...more
6/24/2017
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Article III ,
CAFC ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Private Property ,
Public Property ,
Right to a Jury ,
SCOTUS ,
Separation of Powers ,
Seventh Amendment ,
USPTO
A flurry of activity from various courts this past week on “exceptional cases” under Section 285 of the Patent Act provided notable guidance for practitioners and patent owners, with a particular emphasis on the motivation...more
6/14/2017
/ Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Exceptional Case ,
Frivolous Lawsuits ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Section 285 ,
Totality of Circumstances Test ,
Willful Infringement
In its opinion in Aylus Networks, Inc. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit expanded the scope of prosecution disclaimer to statements made by a patent owner during Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings. The Court explained...more
A recent decision by the Federal Circuit suggests that relying on “common sense” in analyzing whether a patent is obvious in view of prior art cannot always be based on common sense alone. In a decision providing...more
8/24/2016
/ Appeals ,
Apple ,
Common Sense Exception ,
Evidence ,
Expert Testimony ,
Google ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motorola ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Substantial Evidence Standard ,
Vacated
Arming software-patentees with additional precedent in favor of eligibility for software patents post-Alice, the Federal Circuit on June 27, 2016 handed down its decision in BASCOM Global Internet Servs., Inc. v. AT&T...more