News & Analysis as of

Substantial Evidence Standard

Federal Circuit Review - October 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Denies En Banc Rehearing in Mentor Graphics v. EVE-USA - In Mentor Graphics Corp. v. Eve-USA, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2015-1470, 2015-1554, 2015-1556, the Federal Circuit denied Synopsys’ and EVE’s petition for...more

First Appellate District Rejects Urban Decay Claim, Upholds EIR for New El Dorado County Courthouse

by Downey Brand LLP on

Since the 2004 decision in Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield, CEQA petitioners challenging development projects often assert that the lead agency has failed to adequately analyze urban decay...more

Massachusetts Court Upholds Record $2.6M Fine against Beer Distributor

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Earlier this month, a Massachusetts state trial court judge issued a decision in the matter of Craft Beer Guild LLC d/b/a Craft Brewers Guild v. Alcoholic Beverages Control Commission. The court upheld a decision by the...more

The Demise of Rule 36 Judgments in Federal Circuit Decisions Relating to IPRs

The Federal Circuit issued a fairly mundane decision yesterday in Boundary Solutions, Inc. v. Corelogic, Inc.(PTAB October 17, 2017), affirming the PTAB’s decision to cancel all challenged claims of two related patents. Over...more

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

In Allied v. OSMI, the Circuit affirms dismissal of a declaratory judgment action even though Allied’s Mexican distributors had been sued in Mexico on a corresponding Mexican patent. In a first Waymo v. Uber case, the panel...more

“Means” Does Not Always Mean “Means Plus Function”

In Skky, Inc. v. Mindgeek, S.A.R.L. [2016-2018] (June 7, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB decision in IPR 2014-01236 that all of the challenged claims in U.S. Patent 7,548,875 were invalid for obviousness....more

Merely Because Petitioner Changes its Mind is not Enough to Stop Inter Partes Reexamination

In In Re: AT&T Intellectual Property II, L.P., [2016-1830] (May 10. 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB determination in Inter Partes Reexamination, that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,454,071, directed to methods...more

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

In Mylan v. Aurobindo the Circuit affirms the grant of a preliminary injunction based upon the infringement of one of the three patents in suit. However, the panel reverses the injunction as to the other two patents based on...more

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

Our report includes discussions of six of the precedential cases decided in the past week and will include the other three cases in next week’s report. In Aylus v. Apple, the panel finds prosecution disclaimer in a...more

North Carolina Supreme Court Adopts "Substantial Competent Evidence" Requirement for Borrowers Asserting "True Value" Defense in...

by Ward and Smith, P.A. on

On Friday, May 5, 2017, in a major victory for lenders, the North Carolina Supreme Court reversed the North Carolina Court of Appeals’s decision in United Community Bank v. Wolfe. In July 2015, the Court of Appeals decided in...more

Supreme Court of California Ruling Elevates Responsible Agency Role Under CEQA - City's EIR Erred by Failing to Fully Disclose and...

by Holland & Knight LLP on

In Banning Ranch Conservancy v. City of Newport Beach, et al., the Supreme Court of California held that lead agencies need to expressly disclose and consider the jurisdictional claims and regulatory opinions of responsible...more

Third District Finds that EIR for Residential Development Inadequately Assessed Traffic Impacts

by Downey Brand LLP on

Cities charged with preparing EIRs for proposed projects often look to their general plans and other adopted policies to set thresholds of significance for assessing environmental impacts. A lead agency’s discretion to select...more

Federal Circuit Rejects Board’s Understanding of Prior Art

The Federal Circuit has now reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision in Synopsys, Inc. v. ATopTech, Inc. finding claims 1 and 32 of U.S. Patent No. 6,567,967 (the “‘967 patent”) as being “not supported by...more

Finding of Anticipation Must Be Fully Supported by Evidence of Record

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the evidentiary standard for proving anticipation, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) in two separate cases, finding that the PTAB’s conclusion of...more

SC court awards Lowe's employee workers' comp disability benefits

by McNair Law Firm, P.A. on

Employee disabilities are becoming a common issue that employers must address. Short- and long-term disability plans employers often make available to employees, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the varying...more

No Nexus For Novartis Gilenya Patent

by Foley & Lardner LLP on

In Novartis AG v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd., the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) invalidating all claims of U.S. Patent 8,324,283, which is one of four Orange...more

Patent Owner Cannot Create New Claim Construction Issues After the Jury Verdict

In TVIIM, LLC v. McAfee, Inc., [2016-1562] (March 21, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed jury verdicts that U.S. Patent No. 6,889,168 was invalid and not infringed because substantial evidence supported the jury’s findings,...more

Federal Circuit Evaluates PTAB Reliance on Expert Testimony to Satisfy Substantial Evidence

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing for the first time the extent to which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) may rely on expert testimony to satisfy the substantial evidence standard of review, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more

Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. v. Strava, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2017)

In an otherwise unremarkable albeit precedential decision, the Federal Circuit set forth an explication of when the Patent Trial and Appeal Board has, and has not, given the court enough information to determine whether its...more

Merck v. Gnosis: Standard of Review of Factual Findings in IPRs

by Goodwin on

We post frequently about IPRs here on the blog, because they are an efficient and relatively quick way to get a decision on validity of the patents that cover drugs, biologic or otherwise. In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A.,...more

Federal Circuit Review | November 2016

by Knobbe Martens on

Fraud-Detection Patent Claimed Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter - In FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1985, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that FairWarning’s patent...more

Hard to Reverse Adverse PTAB Rulings Under Substantial Evidence Standard

by McDermott Will & Emery on

Over a vigorous dissent, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) decision affirming rejection of all pending claims of a patent as being obvious, as supported...more

Subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration Reviewed Under Substantial Evidence Test

Coastal Hills Rural Preservation v. County of Sonoma et al. (2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 1234 - Why It Matters: The California Court of Appeal applied the substantial evidence standard of review and not the fair argument...more

New York’s Highest Court: No “Stretch” in Yogi’s Independent Contractor Classification

by Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

Seyfarth Synopsis: The New York Court of Appeals recently rejected the narrow view of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board and found that substantial evidence did not support a finding that certain yoga instructors were...more

Substantial Evidence Supports Determination of Reasonable Expectation of Success

In In re Efthymiopoulos, [2016-1003] (October 18, 2016) the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB decision that the claimed invention relating to the administration or an anti-influeza drug “by inhalation through the mouth alone”...more

81 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 4
Cybersecurity

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.