Analysis of patent litigation, PTAB practice, prosecution and pharma IP, written on the data behind LexDana.
Tagged federal circuit · clear
STATIC MEDIA LLC v. LEADER ACCESSORIES LLC Before Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the Western District of Wisconsin. Summary: It was an abuse of discretion to hold a party in contempt for an alleged protective order violation resulting from a third…
CENTRIPETAL NETWORKS, INC. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Before Dyk , Taranto, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: Placing stock in a blind trust does not divest a judge of that stock for…
NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORP. V. HEC PHARM CO., LTD. Before Moore, Hughes, and Linn (dissenting). Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Silence regarding the presence or absence of a limitation in a patent…
Introduction The Mayo/Alice subject-matter eligibility test has been a controversial topic since its creation. Many have argued that it leaves innovators, particularly in the software field, with uncertainty as to whether their advances are patentable. In…
UNIVERSITY OF MASSACHUSETTS v. L’ORÉAL S.A. Before Prost, Mayer, and Taranto . Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: In claims of two patents regarding skin enhancement, the recited concentration…
TIGER LILY VENTURES LTD. v. BARCLAYS CAPITAL INC. Before Lourie , Bryson, and Prost. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : A trademark associated with a bankrupt company was not abandoned…
PAVO SOLUTIONS LLC v. KINGSTON TECHNOLOGY COMPANY, INC. Before: Lourie, Prost , and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary : A court can correct obvious minor typographical or clerical errors in…
ARTHREX, INC. v. SMITH & NEPHEW, INC. Before Moore , Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary : During vacancies of Director and Deputy Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, the Commissioner of Patents may…
KAUFMAN v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION Before Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the District Court for the Southern District of New York Summary: An “automatic” method does not require all steps in the method to be performed without user input and…
MITEK SYS., INC. V. UNITED SERVS. AUTO. ASS’N Before Dyk, Taranto, and Cunningham. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: Declaratory judgment plaintiffs must identify particular facts supporting standing and…
GOOGLE LLC v. IPA TECHNOLOGIES INC. Before Dyk, Schall, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: For purposes of determining whether a reference was prior art, the Board has an obligation to resolve fundamental testimonial…
ATLANTA GAS LIGHT COMPANY v. BENNETT REGULATOR GUARDS, INC. Before Newman, Lourie, and Stoll Summary: Termination decision made by the Board in part based on the time-bar was “intimately related” to the institution decision, and therefore not…
