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,...more
APPLE INC. v. ZIPIT WIRELESS, INC. [OPINION]- PRECEDENTIAL -
Before Hughes, Mayer and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Summary: Notice letters and related...more
4/19/2022
/ Appeals ,
Apple ,
Burden of Proof ,
Declaratory Judgments ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
IP License ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Noninfringement ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-in-Suit ,
Patents ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Wireless Technology
INTEL CORPORATION v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED -
Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Indefinite claims do not preclude patentability analysis at the PTAB....more
12/30/2021
/ Claim Construction ,
Intel ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Qualcomm
INTEL CORPORATION v. QUALCOMM INCORPORATED -
Before Prost, Taranto, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A “generic” motivation to combine that has broad appeal or applicability is not...more
12/30/2021
/ Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
Expert Testimony ,
Intel ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Qualcomm
IN RE: BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY -
Before Prost, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: The specific combination of purely mathematical steps in a...more
MOJAVE DESERT HOLDINGS, LLC v. CROCS, INC.
Before Newman, Dyk, and O’Malley. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: The purchaser or assignee of all assets and interests of the requester of inter...more
In Re Personal Web Technologies LLC -
Before Wallach, Bryson, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Summary: The Kessler doctrine is not limited to cases...more
EAGLE PHARMACEUTICALS INC. V. SLAYBACK PHARMA LLC.
Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: The disclosure-dedication doctrine precludes...more
SPIGEN KOREA CO., LTD. v. ULTRAPROOF, INC.
Before Newman, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the Central District of California.
Summary: Summary judgment of obviousness is improper for a design patent if there is a genuine...more
CARDIONET, LLC v. INFOBIONIC, INC -
Before Dyk, Plager, and Stoll. Dyk dissenting in part. Appeal from the District of Massachusetts.
Summary: Alice step one is a threshold inquiry that can be resolved by analyzing the...more
ILLUMINA, INC. v. ARIOSA DIAGNOSTICS, INC.
Before Lourie, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the Northern District of California.
Summary: Use of a natural phenomenon in a method of preparation claim found patent eligible...more
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...more
CAMPBELL SOUP COMPANY v. GAMON PLUS, INC.
Before Prost, Newman and Moore. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A proper primary reference can have slight differences in design if, in light of overall...more
10/1/2019
/ Appeals ,
Campbell Soup Company ,
Design Patent ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
Prior Art ,
Section 103 ,
Vacated
BRADIUM TECHNOLOGIES LLC V. ANDREI IANCU -
Before Moore, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: A clear and unambiguous definition of a claim term is required to redefine the term to...more
NOVARTIS PHAMACEUTICALS CORP V. WEST-WARD PHARMACEUTICALS -
Before Stoll, Plager, and Clevenger. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: When a method of using a prior art...more
AVX CORPORATION V. PRESIDIO COMPONENTS, INC.
Before Newman, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent and Trial Appeal Board.
Summary: Appellants from an IPR decision to the Federal Circuit must have concrete claims...more
Before Newman, O’Malley, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: Diligence requires “reasonably continuous diligence” and is not negated if the inventor works on improvements and evaluates...more
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Newman, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the PTAB.
Summary: Patent Owner Vertnetx Inc. (“Virnetx”) was collaterally estopped from arguing that a reference was not a printed publication...more
12/11/2018
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Appellate Record ,
Collateral Estoppel ,
Failure To Preserve ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pre-AIA Patents ,
Printed Publications ,
Retroactive Application ,
Rule 36
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Judges Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: A claim that recites a specific method for navigating through...more
10/11/2018
/ 3D-Automation ,
Abstract Ideas ,
Appeals ,
Computer-Related Inventions ,
Google ,
Judgment on the Pleadings ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Reaffirmation ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Section 101
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Prost, Moore, and Reyna. Appeal from the District of Delaware.
Summary: Plain language claim construction will not be narrowed based on the prosecution history unless the patentee...more
Federal Circuit Summary -
En Banc (excl. Chen), Opinion for the court filed by Stoll, joined by Newman, Lourie, Moore, O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District...more
8/2/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 145 ,
Administrative Proceedings ,
American Rule ,
Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
En Banc Review ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Reversal ,
Sua Sponte ,
USPTO ,
Vacated
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Reyna, Taranto, and Hughes. Appeal from the Northern District of California.
Summary: Failure to use the word “means” creates a rebuttable presumption that the term is not a...more
6/7/2018
/ Appeals ,
Apple ,
Clear Error Standard ,
Indefiniteness ,
Means-Plus-Function ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Rebuttable Presumptions ,
Remand ,
Vacated
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Prost, Newman, Lourie, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, Reyna, Wallach, Taranto, Chen, Hughes, and Stoll. On petition for rehearing en banc.
Summary: Under step two of the Alice framework,...more
6/5/2018
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Appeals ,
Claim Construction ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
En Banc Review ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Question of Fact ,
Question of Law ,
Section 101
Federal Circuit Summaries -
Before Reyna, Linn, and Hughes. On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the Eastern District of Texas.
Summary: Under Federal Circuit law, the plaintiff bears the burden of showing that venue is...more
5/18/2018
/ Appeals ,
Arms Length Transactions ,
Burden of Proof ,
Call Centers ,
Mandamus Petitions ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Motion to Transfer ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Principal Place of Business ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Venue
(January 13, 2015) The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s finding that W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc. (“Gore”) willfully infringed U.S. Patent No. 6,436,135 (“the ’135 patent”) . ...more