News & Analysis as of

Abstract Ideas Attorney's Fees Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

McDermott Will & Emery

Don’t Mess With Anna: Texas Town Schools Patent Owner on § 101

On cross-appeals from a granted Fed. R. of Civ. Pro. 12(c) motion on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent directed to a method for “assist[ing] an investigator in...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Specific Factual Allegations of Inventive Concept Defeat Motion to Dismiss

Addressing patent eligibility at the motion to dismiss stage of a case, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s grant of a motion to dismiss, finding that the district court improperly...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Elucidates Berkheimer and Aatrix; Patents Presumed Eligible Under Section 101

Holland & Knight LLP on

• In a precedential opinion in Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc., et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated both the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California's Section 101...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - September 2018

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Finds Claims Issued from Reexamination Co-Pending with Appeal Ineligible Where the Changes Did Not Affect Section 101 Eligibility - In SAP AMERICA, Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2081, the...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2018

Gust, Inc. v. AlphaCap Ventures, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2414 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 28, 2018) In an appeal from a district court decision awarding fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, the Federal Circuit reversed. The decision makes...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - August 2018

WilmerHale on

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more

Knobbe Martens

District Court Awards Attorney’s Fees after Holding That Plaintiff Had Repeatedly Sought to Avoid a Section 101 Ruling

Knobbe Martens on

In Shipping and Transit, LLC v. Hall Enterprises, Inc., a district court recently held that a patent infringement case was “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and the defendant was entitled to recover attorney fees and costs...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Recent Developments In Patent Law May 17, 2017

Update to TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, Case No. 16-341 (May 22, 2017) - In an 8-0 opinion written by Justice Thomas (Justice Gorsuch did not participate), the Supreme Court rules that a defendant...more

Morris James LLP

Attorneys’ Fees Are Awarded; Expert Fees Are Not

Morris James LLP on

Sleet, J. Defendant’s motion for attorneys’ fees and costs is granted in part. The request for expert fees and costs is denied. The court granted defendant’s motion to dismiss based on unpatentable subject matter after...more

9 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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