Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 504: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Judgment as a Matter of Law and Motions for New Trial (Civ Pro)
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 306: Spotlight on Civil Procedure (Part 3 – The Civil Lawsuit)
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 412: Listen and Learn -- Motions for Summary Judgment
What Litigants Need to Know about Summary Judgment
JONES DAY TALKS®: Tiffany v. Costco Raises Trademark Infringement, Counterfeiting Questions
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: Examining FDA’s Enforcement Authority Over Stem Cell Clinics and Compounders
K&L Gates Triage: Avoiding the Risks Associated with Mandatory Vaccination Programs
In Steuben Foods Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppmann Corporation, the Federal Circuit addressed the boundaries a district court may impose on experts by deeming their testimony wrong as a matter of law. Background - Steuben Foods...more
If your company has just been named in a patent infringement lawsuit, you may be facing an unfamiliar and high-stakes process. Patent litigation is unlike most commercial disputes—it involves complex legal standards, highly...more
The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the district court’s summary judgement of noninfringement, finding that the lower court had improperly construed the claim term “pull cord.” The district court had erroneously limited...more
On March 31, 2025, Judge Oetken granted summary judgment for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and certain of its subsidiaries (“Samsung”) in an infringement suit brought against it by Dynamics Inc. (“Dynamics”). Dynamics Inc v....more
Mirror Worlds Technologies, LLC (“Mirror Worlds”) sued Meta Platforms, Inc. (“Meta”)—formerly Facebook, Inc.—in the Southern District of New York for patent infringement. The lawsuit involved three patents related to storing,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement because the district court improperly narrowed a claim term during its construction. IQRIS Technologies...more
Sometimes important contributions to innovation can come from the mundane rather than the extraordinary. One (perhaps apocryphal) example comes from the story of the early development of television by Philo Farnsworth (the...more
This post summarizes some of the significant developments from the Texas District Courts for the month of February 2025....more
Trudell Medical International Inc. v. D R Burton Healthcare, LLC, Appeal Nos. 2023-1777, -1779 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 7, 2025) This week’s Case of the Week presents a cautionary tale for litigators to be sure they’ve timely...more
Steuben Foods, Inc. v. Shibuya Hoppman Corp., Appeal No. 2023-1790 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 24, 2025) In its only precedential patent decision this week, the Federal Circuit addressed an “anachronistic exception, long mentioned but...more
2024 was another busy year for district court decisions! There were multiple jury trials, case-dispositive design patent decisions, and claim construction decisions across a range of venues and at a range of case postures. We...more
Contour IP v. GoPro: Federal Circuit Offers Insight into Alice’s Step One Analysis. In Contour IP v. GoPro, the Federal Circuit reversed a summary judgment order invalidating two of Contour IP’s patents directed to...more
Bound to Happen: Inherent Property Leaves No Question of Reasonable Expectation of Success - In Cytiva Bioprocess R&D Ab v. Jsr Corp., Appeal No. 23-2074, the Federal Circuit held that a claim limitation merely reciting an...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court determination that a patent owner had not provided the “particularized testimony and linking argument” required to demonstrate equivalence under the...more
On April 24, 2024, United States District Court Judge Paul G. Gardephe (S.D.N.Y.) construed claims of three patents asserted by Network-1 Technologies, Inc. against Google LLC and YouTube, LLC. The court found the asserted...more
Columbia sued Seirus, claiming that Seirus’s HeatWave products infringe Columbia’s ’093 design patent for “Heat Reflective Material.” The patent claims “[t]he ornamental design of a heat reflective material, as shown and...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s claim construction and related summary judgment rulings after determining that the district court erred in construing a claim term by...more
The Federal Circuit provided its latest guidance with respect to prosecution disclaimer in K-fee System GMBH v. Nespresso USA, Inc., 2023 WL 8882383, — F.4th — (Fed. Cir. Dec. 26, 2023). K-fee involved patents covering...more
Not surprisingly, the Federal Circuit visited upon Plaintiff/Appellant PureCircle two of the Four Horsemen of the Biotech Patent Apocalypse* in a decision affirming the District Court's invalidation of the claims asserted...more
K-Fee System GmbH v. Nespresso USA, Inc., Appeal No. 2022-2042 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 26, 2023) In an appeal from a district court judgment of noninfringement, the Federal Circuit reversed the underlying claim construction...more
In Finjan LLC, FKA Finjan, Inc. v. SonicWall, Inc., No. 2022-1048 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2023), the Federal Circuit vacated a summary judgement of invalidity based on collateral estoppel, where the case that provided estoppel...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a claim interpretation that flows naturally from the parties’ stipulated claim construction is binding on the parties even if the interpretation reads preferred...more
This case addresses the proper standard for an appeal of a discretionary decision by a successor judge as well as requests for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and certain circumstances that do not make a case...more
We are excited to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural quarterly report on key Federal Circuit decisions. The Spring 2023 Quarterly Report provides summaries of most key patent law-related decisions from January 1, 2023 to March...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury’s noninfringement verdict, finding that the district court correctly interpreted the article “a” and antecedent “said” in the asserted claims to require that a...more