News & Analysis as of

Motion to Dismiss Patent Litigation

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | August 2024

Knobbe Martens on

Specify the Steps of Information Manipulation or Lose under § 101 - In Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd. Appeal No. 22-2216, the Federal Circuit held that patent claims that merely recite result-orientated, functional...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Ruling Clarifies Section 101 Procedures

WilmerHale on

Courts have long interpreted Title 35 of the U.S. Code, Section 101, to bar patenting abstract ideas, laws of nature or natural phenomena. But until six years ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Andersen v. Stability AI: Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Narrows the Case, But Only Slightly

In the lawsuit brought against them for using visual artists' work to teach their large language model, and producing near-identical copies in response to prompts, Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Runway AI moved to...more

Erise IP

Eye on IPRs: August 2024

Erise IP on

Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: Federal Circuit Addresses Waiver of Argument Not Raised in Request for...more

Hudnell Law Group

Intrinsic Record Paramount In Rule 12 Eligibility Determinations

Hudnell Law Group on

In the recent decision of Miller Mendel, Inc. v. City of Anna, Texas, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 17637 (Fed. Cir. July 18, 2024), the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s grant of a motion for judgment on the pleadings under...more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up: June 2024

Fish & Richardson on

Universal Connectivity Tech. Inc. v. Dell Tech. Inc., 1-23-cv-01506 (W.D. Tex.), Dkt. No. 34, Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Susan Hightower to Judge Pitman - A magistrate judge recommended denying...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidation of Patents Manipulating Medical Imaging Data as Abstract

The Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to storing and providing medical images over the web as “virtual views” were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they involved nothing more than “converting data and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Testing Negative: Collateral Order Doctrine Precludes Appellate Jurisdiction

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing appellate jurisdiction in view of the collateral order doctrine, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal of a district court’s ruling denying a motion to dismiss because the district...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2024 #3

Copan Italia SPA v. Puritan Med. Prods. Co. LLC, Appeal No. 2022-1943 (Fed. Cir. May 14, 2024) The Federal Circuit’s only precedential opinion concerning a patent case this week had nothing to do with patent law....more

McDermott Will & Emery

When Is It Really Over? If Additional Proceedings Are Needed, Judgment Is Not Final

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, factually distinguishing the concept of finality in this case from its earlier decision in Fresenius USA v. Baxter Int’l, vacated and remanded a district court’s amended final...more

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

“AI-Related” Chip Patents - 1.6 Billion Reasons Why Google May Have Agreed to Settle

Recent headlines have focused on the $1.6 billion damages claim and Google’s possible exposure in Singular Computing’s patent infringement lawsuit involving Google’s “AI-related” chips. $1.6 billion is certainly not chump...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Struggling to Master the Alice Two-Step: Search Result Display Ineligible for Patent Protection

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a lawsuit involving two software patents directed toward enhancements to search result displays, finding that both patents claimed...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Should This Be an Alice Two-Step or a Section 112 Enablement Waltz?

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit for lack of subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 based on an Alice two-step analysis, with Judge Newman filing a sharp dissent...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Sanderling Management v. Snap Inc. No. 21-2173 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 12, 2023) Alice – 35 U.S.C. § 101

This case addresses patent eligibility under Alice and whether the district court should have afforded the patent owner leave to amend its complaint. Background - Sanderling asserted three patents sharing a common...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Invoking Generic Need for Claim Construction Won’t Avoid § 101 Dismissal

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a patent infringement suit on § 101 grounds, rejecting the patentee’s argument that claim construction or discovery was required before assessing...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - July 2023 #3

SNIPR Technologies Limited v. Rockefeller University, Appeal No. 2022-1260 (Fed. Cir. July 14, 2023) Our case of the week addresses a wrinkle in the law concerning disputes between parties that filed patent applications...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Healthier Choices Management Corp. v. Philip Morris USA, Inc. No. 22-1268 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 12, 2023)

This case addresses pleading standards in view of contradicting factual assertions and a complaint’s disavowal of statements in an exhibit. Healthier Choices Management Corp. (“HCM”) sued Philip Morris for patent...more

Irwin IP LLP

Amended Complaint Gives Plaintiff a Do-Over, Not the Defendant

Irwin IP LLP on

Power Probe Grp., Inc. v. Innova Electronics Corp., 21-cv-00332 (D. Nev. Apr. 27, 2023) While it is accepted that filing an amended complaint supersedes the original complaint rendering it without legal effect, a defendant...more

Jones Day

Erroneous PGR Service Deemed Excusable by Split Panel

Jones Day on

In DynaEnergetics Europe GmbH et al v. QinetiQ Limited (PGR2023-00003), the petitioner filed its petition on the last possible day in the 9-month statutory period to timely file a petition for post-grant review (PGR). The...more

BakerHostetler

The Judicial Response to Eligibility Post-Hantz

BakerHostetler on

On March 20, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a short non-precedential opinion that, among other things, found that a motion to dismiss based on patent ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Allegations in Complaint Prevail over Statements in Exhibit

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, prioritizing specific allegations in the complaint over disclosures in exhibits to the complaint, reversed and remanded a district court decision dismissing an original...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Recharged and Ready to Go?

Phillip Morris can’t seem to catch its breath. As discussed in a previous post, just a few weeks ago the Federal Circuit upheld the ITC’s ban on the importation and sale of Phillip Morris’s line of heated tobacco and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Alice Eligibility Two-Step Dance Continues

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion, holding that patent claims directed to abstract ideas and lacking inventive steps that transform...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Picking an Outfit Is Not Patentable: Judge Aaron Recommends Invention Ineligible Under Section 101

On February 21, 2023, United States Magistrate Judge Stewart D. Aaron (S.D.N.Y.) recommended that Defendant FindMine, Inc.’s (“FindMine”) motion to dismiss the complaint of Plaintiff Stylitics, Inc. (“Stylitics”) be granted...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2022 Design Patents Year in Review: Analysis and Trends: US District Courts: A Busy Year for Design Patents, Including a $17M Jury...

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

276 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 12

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide