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
Luv N’ Care, Ltd. and Nouri E. Hakim v. Lindsey Laurain and Eazy-PZ, LLC, Nos. 2022-1905, 2022-1970 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2024) addressed several issues, including: (1) what evidence of litigation misconduct may support a...more
Infringement Judgement is Only Final when there’s Nothing Left to Do but Execute - In Packet Intelligence LLC v. Netscout Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 22-2064, the Federal Circuit held that an infringement judgment is only...more
As previously reported, the appeal in Fullview v. Polycom, No. 23-1201, involved the question of whether common sense may be relied upon to supply a missing limitation in an obviousness analysis. On Monday, April 29, 2024,...more
In an action involving manufacturers of a self-sealing dining mat for toddlers, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that the defendants were barred from obtaining relief on...more
In 2023, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued three opinions regarding U.S. design patents. The three 2023 opinions are Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., LKQ...more
In February, the Federal Circuit declined to modify or overrule its long-standing test for obviousness in design patents, the Rosen-Durling test, despite arguments that the Supreme Court overruled it in KSR v. Teleflex. A...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
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed two district court decisions, finding that a patent owner who only partially prevailed in one of two appeals was not entitled to any additional patent term adjustments...more
In a recent decision, Flatwork Technologies LLC v Brierley (2020 FC 997), the Federal Court granted summary judgment in favour of the Plaintiff, Flatwork Technologies, LLC (Flatwork), in respect of its patent impeachment...more
C.R. Bard Inc. v. AngioDynamics, Inc., Appeal No. 2019-1756, -1934 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 10, 2020) - Our Case of the Week is one of two cases decided this week in which the Federal Circuit finds that a district court jumped the...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
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, Appeal No. 2018-1763 (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2020) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit modified and re-issued its...more
In what may be simple happenstance, the Federal Circuit issued opinions on the same day reversing a District Court grant of summary judgment in opinions written by Judge Lourie, here in BASF Corp. v. SNF Holding Co....more
Summary judgment, while clearly advantageous, requires that there be no disputed question of material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. When a district court grants judgment...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Prisua Engineering Corp., Appeal No. 2019-1169, -1260 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 4, 2020) - Our case of the week concerns issues particular to inter partes review...more
Expert witness testimony is a frequent (almost ubiquitous) feature of patent litigation, if only because questions of the state of the art or the understanding of one having ordinary skill in the art are almost always at...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
EKO BRANDS, LLC V. ADRIAN RIVERA MAYNEZ ENTERPRISES, INC. ET. AL. Before Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Reyna dissenting in part. Appeal from the Western District of Washington...more
Curver Luxembourg, SARL v. Home Expressions Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2214 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2019) In a significant case in the field of design patents, the Federal Circuit clarified the scope of design patent infringement...more
A weekly summary of the precedential patent-related opinions issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the opinions designated precedential or informative by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board....more
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
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Data Engine Technologies, LLC v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2017-1135 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 9, 2018) - In one of two Section 101 cases this week, the Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, and...more
Hyatt v. Pato (No. 2017-1722, 9/24/18) (Reyna, Wallach, Hughes) - Hughes, J. Reversing dismissal for lack of subject matter description stating, “the exclusive jurisdiction of this court and the Eastern Virginia district...more