News & Analysis as of

Patent Infringement Patent Litigation Standard of Review

McDermott Will & Emery

Change Between Provisional and Nonprovisional Application Is Lexicography

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court judgment of noninfringement, finding that deleting a portion of a definition between a provisional application and a nonprovisional application was...more

Fish & Richardson

How the Timing of Director Review May Affect Co-Pending Litigation

Fish & Richardson on

Director Review at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) remains a hot topic in patent law. The Director first established an interim process for Director Review in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2021 decision in United...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Confirms PTAB Standard of Review

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit in Sisvel International S.A. v. Sierra Wireless, Inc. (Fed. Cir. Sept. 1, 2023) (Prost, Reyna, and Stark) affirmed a PTAB decision finding anticipated and/or obvious certain claims of two patents directed...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Theripion (Fed. Cir. 2023)

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has benefited, particularly after enactment of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, from the deference to its factual findings mandated by the Supreme Court's interpretation in...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Realtime Data LLC v. Reduxio Systems, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

One of the more frustrating aspects of current patent-eligibility law is that it lends itself all too easily to mischief.  In particular, given that the eligibility test under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as interpreted by the courts is...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Immunex Corp. v. Sandoz Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

The Federal Circuit held recently that the "all substantive rights" test, used heretofore to determine the identity of the "patentee" for purposes of satisfying 35 U.S.C. § 281, should be the standard for determining common...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2019 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends: PTAB Operation Under Phillips: Business as Usual with New Strategic Implications

One of the most notable recent changes in post-grant proceedings was replacing the broadest reasonable interpretation (“BRI”) claim construction standard with the Phillips standard used to construe claims in federal court....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - July 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Broad Claim Language and Unpredictability in the Art Lead to Non-Enablement - In Enzo Life Sciences, Inc. v.  Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-2498, -2499, -2545, -2546, broad patent claims were invalid as...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

A Post-Halo World: Companies Need to Be Careful Because Juries Determine Willful Patent Infringement

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court in Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1923, 1932, 195 L. Ed. 2d 278 (2016), relaxed the standard for a finding of willful patent infringement under 35 USC Section 284. The “objective...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

The Circuit issued a single precedential patent decision this week – the Genband v. Metaswitch case where the Circuit vacated the denial of a motion for preliminary injunction out of concern that the district court applied...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Indirect Infringement Not Overcome by Objective Strength of Non-Infringement Case

Addressing indirect infringement and claim construction issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court on three of the four patents at issue, finding that it applied the wrong standard for...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Polar Electro Oy (Fed. Cir. 2016); Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Garmin Int'l., Inc. (Fed. Cir....

In parallel decisions regarding litigation over the same patent, the Federal Circuit affirmed a District Court decision that the claims were invalid for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112(b). This decision, expressly...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Legal FAQ: Introduction to Patent Litigation

Fenwick & West LLP on

Who enforces a patent? When can a district court patent case be filed? What does the patent holder have to prove to win an infringement suit? Fenwick patent litigators Charlene Morrow and Dargaye Churnet cover these and other...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The New Willfulness Paradigm

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Supreme Court of the United States traced two centuries of analysis related to enhanced damages in patent cases to conclude that the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s two-part test, announced nearly a decade...more

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Loosens Standard for Willful Infringement/Enhanced Damages

Polsinelli on

In a relatively rare “pro-patent” decision, the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week unanimously overruled the Federal Circuit’s so-called Seagate standard for finding willful patent infringement and awarding enhanced...more

Goodwin

Supreme Court Unanimously Overturns Rigid Seagate Test in Favor of a Discretionary Test for Awarding Enhanced Damages

Goodwin on

Section 284 of The Patent Act provides that in a case of infringement, courts “may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” Under Seagate, to be entitled to enhanced damages under § 284, a patent...more

McDermott Will & Emery

No Deference by the Federal Circuit to Lower Courts’ Claim Construction Findings - Kaneka Corp. v. Xiamen Kingdomway Grp.; TomTom,...

Addressing issues of claim construction, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently reversed the decisions of two district courts, shedding some light on the impact of the Teva decision on its claim...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Info-Hold Cases: De Novo Review Where Claim Construction Evidence Is Neither Intrinsic Nor Extrinsic and Expert Damages Testimony...

In two decisions involving the same plaintiff and patent but different defendants, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit applied de novo review after choosing not to classify evidence used below and reversed an...more

JAMS

IP Dispute Resolution Review Newsletter, Spring 2015

JAMS on

In This Issue: - The New “Clear Error” Standard of Review in Patent Infringement Mediation - Trademark Trial Appeal Board Decisions Now Have Preclusive Effect - Engaging Panelists for Neutral Analysis Provides...more

Moore & Van Allen PLLC

Congress Takes Up Patent Litigation Reform – Innovation Act Reintroduced, Supreme Court Cases Examined

Congress v SCtPatent litigation reform has been on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee agenda, with the recent reintroduction of legislation seeking to address patent litigation abuses and a hearing examining recent U.S....more

20 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