Analysis of patent litigation, PTAB practice, prosecution and pharma IP, written on the data behind LexDana.
Tagged federal circuit · clear
Western Plastics sued Dubose Strapping for infringing a patent covering a material for wrapping rolls of metal coil. Both parties compete in the metal industry and sell a similar wrap. A North Carolina jury found Dubose willfully infringed Western…
PLASTIC OMNIUM ADVANCED INNOVATION AND RESEARCH V. DONGHEE AMERICA, INC. Before Reyna, Newman, and Clevenger. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The patentee’s lexicography of “parison” excluded the…
Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. TQ DELTA, LLC v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Summary: Findings of fact at the PTAB must be supported by substantial evidence, and conclusory expert testimony, without supporting…
IN RE: IPR LICENSING, INC., Before O’Malley, Newman, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Establishing a motivation to combine two references for an obviousness determination in an IPR requires evidentiary support, and…
PHARMA TECH SOLUTIONS, INC. v. LIFESCAN, INC. Before Moore, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Nevada. Summary: Claims for infringement under the doctrine of equivalents will be barred by prosecution history…
A “catch 22” is defined as a “dilemma or difficult circumstance from which there is no escape because of mutually conflicting or dependent conditions.” (As in if a pilot claims he is too mentally ill to fly missions, he has…
GAME AND TECH. CO., LTD. v. WARGAMING GROUP LTD. Before Dyk, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board, applying Fed. R. Civ. P. 4, must independently determine whether service of a complaint was properly…
KONINKLIJKE KPN N.V. v. GEMALTO M2M GMBH Before Dyk, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the District of Delaware. Summary: Claims directed to improving the functionality of one tool that is part of a system do not necessarily need to recite how that tool is…
COLUMBIA SPORTSWEAR v. SEIRUS INNOVATIVE ACCESSORIES Before Lourie, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for Southern District of California. Summary: An accused infringer’s use of ornamental logos can and should be considered as one…
AIRBUS S.A.S. v. FIREPASS CORPORATION Before Lourie, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Whether an asserted prior art reference is reasonably pertinent to the particular problem solved by the invention, and thus…
TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v. TCL CORPORATION Before NEWMAN, LOURIE, and CLEVENGER. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Publications shelved in publicly accessible libraries may be publicly available prior art references as of the…
In Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir., Oct. 31, 2019) , a three Judge Fed. Cir. panel of Moore, Reyna and Chen took a deep dive into the appointments clause of the constitution and held that PTAB judges (“…
