Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 203: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment (Civ Pro)
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - San Diego Gulls’ Wings Clipped in Dispute Over Logo Copyright
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: San Diego Gulls’ Wings Clipped in Dispute Over Logo Copyright
Jones Day Talks Intellectual Property: Blurrier Lines and Narrow Grounds—Implications of the Ninth Circuit’s Blurred Lines Decision
On March 31, 2025, Judge Oetken granted summary judgment for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and certain of its subsidiaries (“Samsung”) in an infringement suit brought against it by Dynamics Inc. (“Dynamics”). Dynamics Inc v....more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
A district court has ruled that the statutory estoppel arising from an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding does not apply to anticipation and obviousness defenses that rely significantly on a physical device. The court also...more
A federal judge in the Northern District of California recently rejected an argument that would have expanded inter partes review (IPR) estoppel seemingly beyond the plain reading of 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). The plaintiff had...more
One area of estoppel arising from an unsuccessful AIA petition that remains poorly understood relates to prior art that is described both in a printed publication or patent and also was in use by others, such as to create...more
Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more
On April 4, 2019, Chief Judge Patti Saris of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts held in Intellectual Ventures I, LLC v. Lenovo Group Ltd. that a final determination of invalidity in inter...more
A district court in California has granted-in-part a Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment of no invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 103 due to inter partes review (IPR) estoppel. During the pendency of the litigation, Defendants...more
In a case of twisting facts, a trial judge has denied a plaintiff’s motion to correct inventorship to add an inventor to a patent because that plaintiff previously asked the PTO to remove that same inventor from the patent...more
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
In an order issued on April 4, 2018, Judge Lynn granted plaintiff ZitoVault’s motion for summary judgment under 35 U.S.C. 315(e)(2), holding that defendant IBM is estopped from asserting invalidity defenses based on prior art...more