PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK -
Inspired Development Grp, LLC v. Inspired Products Grp., LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1616 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 18, 2019) -
Our first patent case of the week is not, according to the Federal Circuit, a...more
9/24/2019
/ Appeals ,
Dismissals ,
Diversity Jurisdiction ,
Gunn v Minton ,
IP License ,
Notice of Allowance ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Term Adjustment ,
Patents ,
Statutory Interpretation ,
Subject Matter Jurisdiction ,
Summary Judgment ,
Unjust Enrichment ,
USPTO
Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions, Inc. v. Renesas Electronics America, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2016-2121, -2208, -2235 (Fed. Cir. 2018)?-
In an appeal from a jury trial, the Federal Circuit addressed numerous issues...more
5/8/2018
/ Appeals ,
Arbitrary and Capricious ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Breach of Contract ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Disclosure ,
Disgorgement ,
Dismissal With Prejudice ,
Enhanced Damages ,
Experimental Use Exception ,
Inequitable Conduct ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Interference Proceeding ,
Inventions ,
Inventors ,
Irreparable Harm ,
Misappropriation ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Permanent Injunctions ,
Public Use ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Right to a Jury ,
Seventh Amendment ,
Tortious Interference ,
Trade Secrets ,
Twombly/Iqbal Pleading Standard ,
USPTO ,
Vacated ,
Written Descriptions
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK -
SimpleAir, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2016-2738 (Fed. Cir. 2018) -
In SimpleAir, Inc. v Google LLC, the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule...more
3/20/2018
/ Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Claim Preclusion ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Double Patent ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Kessler Doctrine ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Noninfringement ,
Obviousness ,
Parent Patents ,
Patent Applications ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reversal ,
Terminal Disclaimer ,
USPTO ,
Written Descriptions
In Nidec v. Zhongshan, the entire panel affirms a determination of obviousness but two judges question whether § 315(c) of the AIA was improperly used to permit joinder as to a second Zhongshan petition filed after the...more
8/28/2017
/ Admissible Evidence ,
Appeals ,
Burden of Proof ,
Burden-Shifting ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Joinder ,
Limitation Periods ,
Nonobvious ,
Obviousness ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
USPTO ,
Vacated