News & Analysis as of

Patent Litigation › CAFC › Patent Validity

Venable LLP

Federal Circuit Interprets IPR Estoppel Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) to Permit at Trial Invalidity Theories Based on Prior Use or...

Venable LLP on

On May 7, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Ingenico, Inc. v. IOENGINE, LLC, effectively holding that 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) estoppel cannot preclude an IPR petitioner from advancing in a district court trial an...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Impermissible Convoyed Sales Wash Away Damages Award

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding of infringement but vacated its damages award because the award improperly included auxiliary products lacking any functional relationship to...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Clear and Unmistakable Standard for Applying Prosecution Disclaimer

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a district court misconstrued claim terms based on a misapplication of the clear and unequivocal disavowal standard and vacated its noninfringement decision. Maquet...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

ABS Global v. Cytonome/St, LLC: Mootness and Preserving the Argument for Vacatur

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C. on

In 2017, Cytonome filed suit in the Western District of Wisconsin (“the District Court”), accusing ABS of infringing six of its patents, including US Patent No. 8,529,161 (“the ’161 patent”). Subsequently, in October 2017,...more

4 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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide