First Republic Executives Fail in Attempt to Recover Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan Assets
In SnapRays, d/b/a SnapPower v. Lighting Defense Group, the Federal Circuit found that a district court could exercise personal jurisdiction over a declaratory judgment defendant based on the defendant’s sending an Amazon...more
Addressing the issue of personal jurisdiction in the context of a declaratory judgment case involving a program for resolving patent infringement claims, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that a patent...more
Amazon’s Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) program provides an expedited and low-cost tool for patent owners to stop the sale of infringing products on Amazon’s platform. But low cost does not mean low risk. The U.S. Court of...more
The PTAB recently declined to exercise its discretion to deny IPR, instituting review in BMW of North America, LLC v. NorthStar Systems LLC, IPR2023-01017, Paper 12 (Dec. 8, 2023). There, the PTAB held that (1) a Sotera...more
This post continues our summary of substantive orders in patent litigation in the District of Minnesota. It includes a judgment on the pleadings in Hatch-Waxman cases and a declaratory judgment of invalidity....more
Thank you for reading the January 2023 issue of Sterne Kessler's MarkIt to Market® newsletter. This month, we discuss an ongoing trademark dispute between the band OK Go and cereal company Post, how to stay vigilant about...more
The Federal Circuit has held that communications related to buying or licensing patents can form the basis for personal jurisdiction in a patent infringement lawsuit. The case of APPLE INC. v. ZIPIT WIRELESS, INC....more
APPLE INC. v. ZIPIT WIRELESS, INC. [OPINION]- PRECEDENTIAL - Before Hughes, Mayer and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Notice letters and related...more
On February 8, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that certain restrictions on the ability to challenge the validity of patents are enforceable. Without such restrictions, companies that are...more
APPLE INC. V. WI-LAN INC. Before Moore, Chief Judge, Bryson, and Prost. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of California. Summary: Construing a broad claim term to be re-defined as...more
A recent PTAB decision in Sattler Tech Corp. v. Lyu represents an important reminder to carefully review the procedural and substantive requirements for filing a petition for an AIA trial, especially when dealing with...more
ROHM SEMICONDUCTOR USA, LLC v. MAXPOWER SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: An arbitration agreement, which...more
ENERGY HEATING, LLC v. HEAT ON-THE-FLY, LLC - Before Moore, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of North Dakota. Summary: Enforcing a patent with knowledge that it is invalid can...more
Similar to the laws in the United States and Europe, Chinese law allows those accused of patent infringement to commence actions for declaring non-infringement of patents to clear away the uncertainties. A key precondition...more
Optis Wireless Technology, LLC filed a declaratory judgment action in the Eastern District of Texas seeking judgment that it complied with its fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) obligations when it offered a...more
CAR T-Cell therapy, a new biologic therapy, is taking off. As companies continue to develop this new and promising therapy, patent litigation inevitably follows. ...more
BECAUSE PLAINTIFFS FAILED TO SHOW SPECIFICALLY HOW DEFENDANTS COMMITTED ANY ACT OF INFRINGEMENT IN NEW JERSEY—PARTICULARLY BY FILING AN ANDA IN WEST VIRGINIA WITH THE FDA IN MARYLAND—OR THAT ANY FUTURE, INTENDED ACTS WERE A...more
On August 23, 2019, the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a precedential opinion relating to the one-year time bar under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). ...more
Standard-essential patent holders and implementers may face uncertainty regarding licensing practices following a May 23 Texas court ruling. In the ruling, a Texas federal judge reached a conclusion different from a recent...more
Our previous blog post on NHK Spring Co. v. Intri-Plex Techs., Inc., No. IPR2018-00752, Paper 8 (PTAB Sept. 12, 2018) (precedential), noted the PTAB’s exercise of its § 314(a) discretion to deny IPR institution, despite the...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Jack Henry & Associates, Inc. v. Plano Encryption Technologies LLC, Appeal No. 2016-2700 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 7, 2018) On Friday, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of a...more
Global Equity Management (SA) Pty. Ltd. (“GEMSA”), a foreign non-practicing entity (“NPE”) organized under the laws of Australia, filed almost 40 patent lawsuits in five batches in 2015 and 2016. The majority of these...more
District court patent defendants often request a parallel inter partes review (“IPR”) proceeding at the U.S. Patent Office to challenge the validity of the patent at issue. As such IPR proceedings have the potential to kill...more
Alien Tort Statute (ATS)/Torture Victims Protection Act (TVPA)/Anti-Terrorism Act (ATA) - District Court Dismisses ATS Claim Where Alleged Conduct in US Was Not Directly Linked to Injuries Claimed in Other Countries - ...more
BriarTek IP, Inc. Petitions for Writ of Certiorari - On February 10, 2016, BriarTek IP, Inc. filed a petition for writ of certiorari to review a judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that...more