Latest Posts › Patent Infringement

Share:

One-Year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties That Become Privies of the Litigant Prior to Institution

POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC v. SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTS - Before Prost, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: An IPR is time-barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) if, at the time of...more

In Re: Google LLC

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Prost, Newman, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll. Dissenting opinion to denial of petition for rehearing written by Reyna and joined by Newman...more

Defendant Is Not Estopped from Relying on a Prior Art Reference in District Court that Is Related to a Reference Used in a CBM So...

In Solutran, Inc. v. U.S. Bancorp & Elavon, Inc., No. 13:cv-02637, 2018 WL 1276999 (D. Minn. Mar. 12, 2018), the court denied the plaintiff’s Motion in Limine and held that CBM estoppel does not apply to related applications...more

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc.

Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Moore, O’Malley, and Wallach. Appeal from the Eastern District of Texas (Judge Gilstrap). Summary: Claims directed to summarizing and presenting information on display interfaces for...more

Google Gets Their Attorneys’ Fees Back for Having to Fight Off a Weak Patent Infringement Suit

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

5 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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