Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 286: Listen and Learn -- Conclusory Pleadings Under Rule 12(b)(6) (Civ Pro)
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - Could Netflix Be Liable in "When They See Us" Defamation Case?
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: Could Netflix Be Liable in "When They See Us" Defamation Case?
In an appeal stemming from the denial of a preliminary injunction and dismissal of the complaint, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarified its precedent and explained that a district court may construe claims...more
When Minnesota's Attorney General Keith Ellison announced in June 2020 that his office had filed a climate change lawsuit, the litigation strategy he described was relatively novel for a climate change case. Rather than...more
Adaptive Streaming, the owner of U.S. Patent No. 7,047,305, sued Netflix in the Central District of California for alleged infringement. Netflix moved to dismiss the case on the pleadings under Rule 12(b)(6), asserting that...more
Is a new method of diagnosing a disease patentable? Can it survive a motion to dismiss? And, irrespective of the current precedent, should a new method of diagnosing a disease be patentable? These are questions the U.S. Court...more
In CardioNet, LLC, et al. v. InfoBionic, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s ruling that affirmed a defendant’s 12(b)(6) motion that the asserted claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, based on step one...more
Seeking to control healthcare costs, many group health plans have adopted amendments that lower reimbursement rates for the treatment of end-stage renal disease ("ESRD"), which requires long-term dialysis treatment or a...more
In a recent order issued in the Northern District of Texas, Judge Godbey denied a Defendant’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion despite the Federal Circuit’s holding that the asserted patent was invalid as indefinite. Hyosung TNS, Inc. v....more
On December 5, 2019, Judge David C. Godbey of the Northern District of Texas denied the defendant Diebold Nixdorf, Inc.’s (“Diebold”) motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), in Nautilus Hyosung Inc. v. Diebold, Inc. et al.,...more
About a year ago, we blogged on Zloop v. Parker Poe, in which the North Carolina Business Court dismissed an appeal because the notice of appeal was directed to the North Carolina Court of Appeals instead of the Supreme Court...more
Addressing the various factors a court may consider in order to determine whether a claim is “directed to” an abstract idea, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of all claims...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a dismissal of a complaint for failing to state a claim under FRCP 12(b)(6), finding error in the district court’s use of judicial notice to do fact-finding outside the...more
Earlier last week, a Second Circuit panel resolved a sharp disagreement among district courts regarding the interpretation of the forum defendant rule in the context of a multi-district litigation (“MDL”) involving dozens of...more
Addressing whether a district court properly dismissed a Lanham Act case as a sanction for failure to timely file an amended complaint, the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded that the dismissal sanction was...more
University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. v. General Electric Company, Appeal No. 2018-1284 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 26, 2019) - The Court this week affirmed the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of an infringement lawsuit, finding...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for N.D. Ohio. Summary: On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a district court cannot judicially notice facts that are subject to...more
Continental Circuits LLC v. Intel Corporation (No. 2018-1076, 2/8/19) (Lourie, Linn, Taranto)* - Lourie, J. Vacating the district court’s judgment of non-infringement of four asserted patents based on claim construction...more
Patent eligibility challenges under 35 U.S.C. §101 have been effective tools for defendants to obtain early dismissal of a case without extensive fact finding since the Supreme Court ruling in Alice. Whether a claim recites...more
On Aug. 13, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued an opinion in a securities fraud class action, Khoja v. Orexigen Therapeutics, No. 16-56069 2018 U.S. App. LEXIS 22371 (9th Cir. Aug. 13, 2018),...more
A Complaint Identifying Infringing Products and the Patents Allegedly Infringed, Accompanied by Statements that the Products Meet All Elements of at Least One Claim of the Asserted Patents, May be Sufficient to Meet the...more
After having its complaint for patent infringement dismissed for failure to state a claim and being denied its request to file an amended complaint in the Middle District of Georgia, Disc Disease Solutions turned to the...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Reyna, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. Summary: A complaint that attaches the asserted patents, specifically...more
Federal district courts are supposed to grant leave to amend a complaint “freely … when justice so requires.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(2). The Seventh Circuit has construed this directive to require, in most cases, that a...more
Distribution Agreements Can Constitute Offers for Sale Under Section 102(b) - In The Medicines Company v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2014-1469, 2014-1504, the Federal Circuit held that a distribution agreement qualified as...more
Setting a new course with respect to 35 USC § 101 litigation issues, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the issue of whether a claim recites patent eligible subject matter—a traditional question of...more