What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Hilary Preston, Vice Chair at Vinson & Elkins, Discusses Energy Innovation: Protecting Your Intellectual Property Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
(Podcast) The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
(Podcast) The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
A Conversation with Phil Hamzik
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
4 Tips for Protecting Your AI Products
Innovating with AI: Ensuring You Own Your Inventions
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Using Innovative Technology to Advance Trial Strategies | Episode 70
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Kroy IP Holdings, LLC sued Groupon, Inc., alleging infringement of 13 claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,061,660 (“’660 patent’), which relates to incentive programs over computer networks. Those claims were invalidated via...more
The Federal Circuit in Voice Tech Corp. v. Unified Patents, LLC, No. 2022-2163 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2024) (Lourie, Chen, and Cunningham), affirmed the PTAB’s determination that claims of Voice Tech Corp.’s (“Voice Tech”) U.S....more
The Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to storing and providing medical images over the web as “virtual views” were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they involved nothing more than “converting data and...more
In 2014, the Supreme Court upended U.S. patent law in the landmark ruling for Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International. The Alice decision established new standards for determining whether inventions, especially those related...more
Chewy, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corporation - Before Moore, Chief Judge, Stoll and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York....more
Avoiding § 101 Eligibility Issues in Internet-Centric Method Claims - In Weisner v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 21-2228, the Federal Circuit held that the specific implementation of an abstract idea, such as improving Internet...more
Summary: A patentee’s allegation that computer method claims made data analysis more efficient, without reference to the function or operation of the computer itself, was not sufficient to overcome a challenge under 35 U.S.C....more
INVT SPE LLC v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Appeal No. 2020-1903 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 31, 2022) - In its only precedential patent case last week, the Federal Circuit issued a lengthy opinion that revolved around claims that are drawn...more
KAUFMAN v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION - Before Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the Southern District of New York - Summary: An “automatic” method does not require all steps in the method to be...more
Genuine Enabling Technology LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2020-2167 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 1, 2022) - The Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent opinion this week turned on issues of claim construction. In...more
GENUINE ENABLING TECHNOLOGY LLC V. NINTENDO CO., LTD - Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Western District of Washington. Summary: A finding of prosecution disclaimer must be supported by an unambiguous...more
No Assembly, No Infringement – Federal Circuit Declines to Expand the “Final Assembler” Theory of Direct Infringement In Acceleration Bay LLC v. Take-Two Interactive Software, Appeal No. 20-1700 the Federal Circuit held that...more
COSMOKEY SOLUTIONS GMBH & CO. KG V. DUO SECURITY LLC - Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Patent claims directed to...more
UNIVERSAL SECURE REGISTRY LLC v. APPLE INC. Before Taranto, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee’s reference to existing known methods and techniques in...more
Bot M8 LLC, a patent assertion entity, was unsuccessful in its effort to have the Federal Circuit reverse the lower court’s invalidity finding related to one of six different patents asserted against Sony in Northern District...more
FREE STREAM MEDIA CORP. v. ALPHONSO INC. Before Judges Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California - Summary: Patent claims were directed to an abstract...more
This decision is bad. Not an American Axle level of bad, but still quite far from good. Simio sued FlexSim in the District of Utah for alleged infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 8,156,468. FlexSim moved for dismissal on...more
Introduction - Packet Intelligence sued NetScout in the Eastern District of Texas, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 6,665,725, 6,839,751, and 6,954,789. The District Court ruled that all three patents were valid...more
In Linksmart Wireless Tech., LLC v. Caesars Entm’t Corp., Case No. 2:18-cv-00862-MMD-NJK (D. Nev. May 8, 2020) the Court addressed disputed claim terms in U.S. Reissued Patent No. RE46,459 (the “’459 Patent”), Linksmart had...more
The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s dismissal because the claims directed to an interactive video game for learning to play guitar were patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In its ruling, the court...more
In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit vacated the district court’s summary judgment of non-enablement because the systems identified by patent challengers as non-enabled under § 112 were not covered by the claims. Because...more
By reversing the lower court’s ruling that the asserted claims were not patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in Uniloc v. LG Electronics, the Federal Circuit resurrected Uniloc’s infringement suit against LG Electronics. It...more
Plaintiff brought suit in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California for alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,548,902, which related to online loan origination services. The defendant moved for...more
On January 13, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari in the following cases...more
It is often said that “ignorance of the law is no excuse.” The same basic principle applies to patent infringement—as a defendant in a Texas patent case recently discovered, much to its chagrin. The US District for the...more