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 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
Cell therapy products in the U.S. are estimated to be worth approximately $4.5 billion currently and expected to grow to over $30 billion in the next ten years. As market value increases litigation is bound to heat up....more
Claimants sued Waiting Room Solutions alleging various causes of action arising out of an employee placing a video camera in its women’s restroom and Waiting Room’s handling of the employee’s actions. Waiting Room’s liability...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Apple Inc. v. Voip-Pal.com, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1456, -1457 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 25, 2020) - In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed two novel issues following inter partes review...more
Chief Judge Stark granted a patent owner’s motion for summary judgment of inter partes review (IPR) estoppel, holding that obviousness defenses based on a prior art product could not be asserted because a prior art...more
A Central District of California judge recently granted summary judgment of no obviousness based on inter partes review (IPR) estoppel because the only prior art references used to challenge patent validity could have been...more
In a case involving at-home glucose monitoring systems, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found the patent owner was estopped from asserting a doctrine of equivalents theory of infringement based on subject...more
Assignor estoppel is an equitable doctrine that prevents a party who assigns a patent to another from later challenging the validity of the assigned patent. As reported in a prior post, the Federal Circuit recently stated...more
The court in Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Wangs All. Corp., No. 14:cv-12298, 2018 WL 283893 (D. Mass. Jan. 2, 2018) denied summary judgement of no invalidity, finding that the Federal Circuit’s holding in Shaw forecloses a...more
Core Wireless v. LG affirms the denial of summary judgment as to unpatentable subject matter, ruling that the asserted claims are directed to an improved user interface for computing devices, not to the abstract idea of an...more
The Supreme Court of the State of New York (Appellate Division)(“Court”) in a December 22, 2017, Memorandum and Order (“Order”) addressed whether a lower court erred in failing to dismiss a third-party claimant’s...more
The Supreme Court of the State of New York (Appellate Division) (“Court”) in a November 9th Memorandum and Order (“Order”) addressed whether field invoices provided to a customer for the performance of hydraulic fracturing...more
On May 11, 2017, Magistrate Judge Roy Payne in the Eastern District of Texas recommended that patentee Biscotti’s inter partes review (IPR) estoppel motion be granted–in-part and denied-in-part....more
Stark, C.J. Plaintiff’s motion to vacate summary judgment of no willfulness is denied. Additional issues addressed in a status letter are resolved. A jury trial was held January 11-26, 2016. The court previously, based...more
In an opinion addressing prosecution history estoppel, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision granting summary judgment of non-infringement, finding that the patentee was estopped...more
Arcane aspects of the law are frequently analogized as constituting "traps for the unwary," and patent law seems to have more than its share of minutiae that fall within that characterization. The equitable principle of...more
Since their introduction, inter partes review (“IPR”) proceedings have had a close association with district court litigation. Indeed, litigation defendants are often the petitioners who initiate IPR proceedings. Therefore,...more
In an order recently issued in EEOC v Jetstream Ground Services, Inc., Case No. 13-CV-02340 (D. Colo. Sept. 29, 2015), Judge Christine Arguello of the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado ruled that the EEOC had...more
In a recent District of Massachusetts case, a defendant attempted to use the crucible of summary judgment to invalidate the plaintiff’s body temperature detection patents. But, as shown in the Court’s ruling, sometimes that...more
The first line of the Seventh Circuit’s opinion says it all: “This case provides a warning for insurance companies who refuse to defend their insureds.” As the court’s admonishment suggests, insurers that improperly refuse to...more
The Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County denied defendant OneBeacon Insurance Company’s (“OneBeacon”) motion for summary judgment against plaintiffs Century Indemnity Company (“Century”) and Pacific Employers...more