JONES DAY TALKS®: Consumer Protection Enforcement Changes Likely After SCOTUS AMG Decision
Key Takeaways from the AMG Capital Management v. FTC Decision
The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court ruling setting aside a final judgment of patent infringement, including a $1.1 million damages award and a permanent injunction. The appellee brought the motion to vacate...more
On May 5, in Cap Export, LLC v. Zinus, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a district court properly vacated its earlier judgment of infringement in favor of Zinus after evidence came to light that Zinus’s president gave...more
HAFCO FOUNDRY AND MACHINE CO. v. GMS MINE REPAIR - Before Newman, Chen, and Stoll. Opinion filed per curiam. Appeal from the Southern District of West Virginia. Summary: Objections to jury instructions should be timely...more
We do not usually report on district court cases, but the Columbia Sportswear v. Seirus design patent case handled by our firm is particularly interesting, given the award of all of defendant’s profits, and the district...more
Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more
The Circuit affirms the decision in Secured Mail v. Universal to dismiss an infringement case under Rule 12(b)(6), holding that all of the asserted claims of the seven patents are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter....more
Millennium Pharmaceuticals v. Sandoz Inc. (No. 2015-2006, 7/17/17) (Newman, Mayer, O'Malley) - Newman, J.Reversing and vacating judgments of invalidity for obviousness in consolidated appeals. ...more
Speculative Evidence of Irreparable Harm Sinks Bayer's Request for Permanent Injunction - Bayer Pharma AG, et al. v. Watson Laboratories, Inc. (D. Del. December 28, 2016) - Applying the eBay factors to Plaintiff...more
Addressing obviousness issues, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s finding that patents were valid and infringed, despite undeniably including recitations falling within a prior art...more