News & Analysis as of

Judgment As A Matter Of Law Obviousness

McDermott Will & Emery

No Money, Mo’ Problems: Speculative Damages Award Cannot Stand

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court’s claim construction and jury instructions but reversed a premature judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on obviousness and an imprecise damages award....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2023 #3

Cyntec Company, Ltd. v. Chilisin Electronics Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1873 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 16, 2023) In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a California district court’s judgment as a...more

Knobbe Martens

Joining an IPR Triggers IPR Estoppel Only for Instituted Grounds

Knobbe Martens on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Valeant Pharmaceuticals Int'l v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Summary judgment, while clearly advantageous, requires that there be no disputed question of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.  When a district court grants judgment...more

Knobbe Martens

Non-Expert Testimony on Obviousness Is Inadmissible

Knobbe Martens on

HVLPO2, LLC v. OXYGEN FROG, LLC - Before Newman, Moore, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida. Summary: It is an abuse of discretion to permit a witness to testify...more

McDermott Will & Emery

A Decision on Appeal Is Final . . . Mostly

McDermott Will & Emery on

In the latest round of the Apple/VirnetX saga, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held to its precedents in determining when 35 USC § 317(b) estoppel is triggered against inter partes re-examinations. VirnetX...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | November 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Fraud-Detection Patent Claimed Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter - In FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1985, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that FairWarning’s patent...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

The Decision To Grant Rehearing En Banc In Apple v. Samsung

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On October 7, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued another decision in the ongoing patent litigations between Apple and Samsung that began in the Northern District of California. The district court had found at summary judgment...more

McDermott Will & Emery

First Application of Supreme Court’s Halo Willfulness Framework

McDermott Will & Emery on

In its first post-Halo decision on willful infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s award of enhanced damages in WBIP LLC v. Kohler Co., Case Nos. 15-1038; -1044...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - July 2016 #2

WilmerHale on

WBIP, LLC v. Kohler Co. (No. 2015-1038, -1044, 7/19/16) (Moore, O'Malley, Chen) - Moore, J. Affirming denial of JMOL that patent was invalid as obvious and lacked an adequate written description, affirming finding of...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | May 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Construes Claim Term in a Manner that Rendered Claim Language Superfluous - In SimpleAir, Inc. v. Sony Ericsson Mobile Commc’ns AB, Appeal No. 2015-1251, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Non-Analogous Art Is Not Prior Art for Purposes of Obviousness - Circuit Check Inc. v. QXQ Inc.

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issue of obviousness, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and restored the jury’s verdict finding the patents-at-issue not invalid, because the prior art in dispute was...more

Locke Lord LLP

Federal Circuit Provides Plain Language Test for Analogous Art

Locke Lord LLP on

Whether or not a prior art reference constitutes “analogous art” for purposes of an obviousness inquiry under 35 U.S.C. § 103 has been the subject of debate in many instances. On July 28, 2015, the Federal Circuit, in Circuit...more

13 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