News & Analysis as of

Judicial Estoppel Patent Invalidity

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Accused Infringer Not Judicially Estopped from Asserting Claim Construction Different from that Previously Presented to PTAB

During a Markman hearing, a judge in the Eastern District of North Carolina denied a plaintiff’s request that the defendant be judicially estopped from arguing claim constructions that were different from positions the...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

N.D. Ill.: Neither Statutory Estoppel nor “Misleading” Statements Regarding Its Scope Sufficient to Knock Out Invalidity Defenses

A district court has ruled that the scope of IPR estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) did not apply to invalidity grounds that relied on physical products. The court also declined to apply judicial estoppel, notwithstanding...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Logic to Modify: Even Deceptive Intent Does Not Bar Inventorship Correction

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court invalidity determination finding that judicial estoppel prevented a patent owner from relisting an inventor previously removed for strategic litigation...more

Knobbe Martens

Inventor Removed From Patent May Be Restored Due to Claim Construction

Knobbe Martens on

EGENERA, INC. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Before Prost, Stoll, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Summary: A patentee that successfully petitioned to correct a patent’s...more

Proskauer - New England IP Blog

Court Sends Networking Patent Inventorship Dispute to Bench Trial

In order to qualify as an inventor on a U.S. patent, a person must contribute to the conception of the invention as embodied in one or more of the claims—merely building or implementing the already-conceived technology is not...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IPR Estoppel Extends Only to Instituted (and Subsumed) Grounds; Arguments in Support of a Motion to Stay, Amidst Developing Law,...

On January 19, 2017, Judge Susan Illston of the Northern District of California granted-in-part and denied-in-part a group of plaintiffs’ (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) motion to strike portions of defendant Ariosa Diagnostic,...more

6 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