News & Analysis as of

Patents Dismissal With Prejudice Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Koss Corporation v. Bose Corporation

This case addresses the application of issue preclusion in relation to the validity of three patents. In particular, this case focuses on the implications of decisions made during the dismissal of pending litigations and...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2023 #3

Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2263, -2264, -2265, -2266 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2023) In an appeal from a stipulated judgment of noninfringement and invalidity following an adverse claim construction...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Past and Future: How Prior IPR Representations Can Haunt Your Future Patent Infringement Complaint

Foley & Lardner LLP on

Judge Albright of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas granted, in part, Meta Platforms, Inc.’s (“Meta”) 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss (“Motion”) in Grecia Estate Holdings LLC v. Meta Platforms, Inc....more

Jones Day

Joinder Denied For Petitioner Whose Invalidity Case Was Dismissed With Prejudice

Jones Day on

In the PTAB’s recent decision in Code 200 v. Bright Data Ltd., IPR2021-01503, Paper No. 13 (PTAB Mar. 14, 2022), the PTAB expounded upon the circumstances in which joinder of a “me-too” case under § 315(b) was not...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - June 2020

Knobbe Martens on

Non-Infringement Need Not Be “Actually Litigated” To Shield Accused Products From Infringement Liability In Subsequent Actions - In In Re Personal Web Technologies LLC, Appeal No. 19-1918, the Federal Circuit ruled that the...more

Knobbe Martens

Costs Awarded to Defendant After Case Dismissed for Mootness

Knobbe Martens on

B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C. v. FACEBOOK, INC. Before Lourie, Plager, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. Summary: A decision on the merits is not a prerequisite...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

PTAB Precedential Decision on 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1) Shows Dismissed Civil Actions Still Bar IPR Institution

Foley & Lardner LLP on

The PTAB recently designated a decision interpreting 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1) as precedential. Cisco Systems Inc. v. Chrimar Systems, Inc. (IPR2018-01511, Paper No. 11) addresses the 35 U.S.C. § 315(a)(1) bar in light of the...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - April 2019

Knobbe Martens on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2018

Gust, Inc. v. AlphaCap Ventures, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2414 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 28, 2018) In an appeal from a district court decision awarding fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, the Federal Circuit reversed. The decision makes...more

Knobbe Martens

Click-To-Call Technologies, LP v. Ingenio, Inc., Yellowpages.Com, LLC

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circut Summary - Before O’Malley, Taranto, and Stark; Partial En Banc Decision before Prost, Newman, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and...more

Knobbe Martens

PTAB Applies Collateral Estoppel to Exclude Purported Patent Owner

Knobbe Martens on

The PTAB issued an order applying collateral estoppel to determine that one purported owner of U.S. Patent 7,215,752 and U.S. Patent 7,844,041 (the “challenged patents”) had no authority to act as the patent owner in...more

11 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