Latest Publications

Share:

Licensee Lacks Standing to Appeal an Adverse IPR Decision Based On Royalty Payments for a Patent Portfolio and a Speculative...

APPLE, INC. v. QUALCOMM, INC. Before Moore, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Apple lacked standing to appeal an IPR decision upholding patents it licenses from Qualcomm, despite...more

Federal Circuit Affirms $173 Million Award

BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC v. BAXALTA INC. Before Newman, Linn, and Stoll. Appeal from the District of Delaware. Summary: In upholding a $173 million dollar award, the Federal Circuit permitted a damages expert to present a...more

Concrete Plans Establish Standing for IPR Appeals

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY v. RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGIES CORP. Before Lourie, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party has standing to appeal an adverse IPR decision if it has concrete...more

Eligibility for CBM Review Is Not Appealable

SIPCO, LLC v. EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board’s determination that a patent qualifies for CBM review is non-appealable under 35...more

No Harm, No Stay: Petition for Certiorari Not Enough to Stop Mandate

AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING v. NEAPCO HOLDINGS LLC - Before Dyk, Moore, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. (AAM) sued Neapco...more

Reasonable Or Not, Make Sure You Don’t Believe You Infringe

TECSEC, INC., v. ADOBE INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: Even if it would be objectively reasonable to view a defendant’s conduct as...more

Joining an IPR Triggers IPR Estoppel Only for Instituted Grounds

NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY, HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE COMPANY - Before Prost, Newman, and Bryson. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: A...more

Patent Owner Arguments Do Not Limit the Scope of the Issues the Board May Address in Its Final Written Decision

FANDUEL, INC. v. INTERACTIVE GAMES LLC - Before Dyk, Moore, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board does not violate the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) if it institutes trial...more

IPR Real-Parties-In-Interest Determination Is Final and Non-Appealable

ESIP SERIES 2, LLC V. PUZHEN LIFE USA, LLC - Before Reyna, Lourie, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTAB’s determination that an IPR petition identifies all real parties in...more

Standing to Appeal an Adverse IPR Decision Requires an Injury

ARGENTUM PHARM. LLC v. NOVARTIS PHARM. CORP. Before Lourie, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A party lacks standing to appeal an adverse IPR...more

Supreme Court Holds Willfulness Is Not Required to Award Profits for Trademark Infringement

ROMAG FASTENERS, INC. v. FOSSIL, INC. Before the Supreme Court of the United States. On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Summary: Trademark owners are not required to...more

Voluntary Dismissal With Prejudice Does Not Preclude Attorney’s Fees

KEITH MANUFACTURING CO. v. BUTTERFIELD - Before Taranto, Clevenger, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Summary: A voluntary dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(a)...more

Time-bar Challenges to IPR under Section 315(b) Can Be Waived

Time-bar Challenges to IPR under Section 315(b) Can Be Waived - ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY INC. v. ITRON NETWORKED SOLUTIONS INC (NOS. 2019-1059 & 2019-1060) - ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY INC. v. ITRON NETWORKED SOLUTIONS INC (NO....more

A “Regular and Established Place of Business” Under the Patent Venue Statute Requires the Presence of an Employee or Agent...

IN RE: GOOGLE LLC - Before Dyk, Wallach, and Taranto. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: A defendant does not have a “regular and established place of...more

39 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