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
Following a lengthy and extensive litigation that began in 2011 that culminated in a U.S. Supreme Court decision in December of 2016, smartphone industry titans Apple and Samsung will again find themselves in Federal District...more
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
In the latest development in the patent skirmishes between Apple and Samsung, on Monday, January 18, 2016, U.S. District Court Judge Lucy Koh of the Northern District of California entered a permanent injunction barring...more
On Thursday, September 17, 2015, in the fourth Federal Circuit opinion arising out of the patent skirmishes between global high technology titans Apple and Samsung Electronics, a sharply divided Federal Circuit panel vacated...more
10/5/2015
/ Abuse of Discretion ,
Apple ,
Apple v Samsung ,
Article III ,
eBay Test ,
Injunctive Relief ,
iPhone ,
Irreparable Harm ,
Nexus ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Permanent Injunctions ,
Public Interest ,
Samsung ,
Standing ,
Vacated