Latest Posts › Patent Litigation

Share:

Domestic Marketing and Distribution of an Imported Product May Satisfy the Economic Prong of the Domestic-Industry Requirement

LASHIFY, INC. V. ITC - Before Prost, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. International Trade Commission. Warehousing, quality control, distribution, sales, and marketing expenses incurred in connection with an imported...more

Limits of Inherent Anticipation in Product-By-Process Claims

RESTEM, LLC v. JADI CELL, LLC - Before Moore, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Inherency in product-by-process claims requires the prior art process to inevitably produce the claimed...more

IPR Standing Arguments Not Presented to the Board Are Forfeited

APPLE INC. v. GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC - Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial And Appeal Board. A patent owner forfeits its argument that an IPR petitioner lacks standing under 35 U.S.C....more

Reversal on Reverse Doctrine of Equivalents

Conflicting expert testimony constituted substantial evidence supporting the jury’s rejection of a reverse doctrine of equivalents argument....more

Bound to Happen: Inherent Property Leaves No Question of Reasonable Expectation of Success

CYTIVA BIOPROCESS R&D AB V. JSR CORP. - Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A claim limitation merely reciting an inherent property or result of an otherwise obvious...more

Jury Instructions Must Describe All Relevant Objective Indicia of Non-obviousness

INLINE PLASTICS CORP V. LACERTA GROUP, LLC - Before Taranto, Chen, and Hughes.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts....more

Being Known Is Not Enough

VIRTEK VISION INTERNATIONAL ULC, v. ASSEMBLY GUIDANCE SYSTEMS, INC., DBA ALIGNED VISION - Before Moore, Hughes, and Stark.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”)....more

A Terminal Disclaimer Is Not an Escape Hatch

IN RE CELLECT, LLC - Before Lourie, Dyk, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Obviousness-type double patenting analyses for patents with Patent Term Adjustments are based on the...more

Evidence of Commercial Success and the Prior Art

YITA LLC V. MACNEIL IP LLC - Before Taranto, Chen, and Stoll.  Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Evidence of commercial success that relates entirely to an individual claim element that was...more

Who Bears the Burden of Proof for IPR Estoppel?

IRONBURG INVENTIONS LTD. v. VALVE CORP. Before Lourie, Clevenger, and Stark.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Summary: The patentee has the burden of proving that...more

Claim Directed to Specific, Hardware-Based Data Structure That Enables Technological Improvement Is Eligible Under § 101

ADASA INC. v. AVERY DENNISON CORPORATION - Before Moore, Hughes and Stark.  Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Summary: A claim directed to a specific, hardware-based data...more

11 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