The Court of Appeals of Virginia vacated a $2 billion award in a trade secret misappropriation case based on a series of evidential errors and improper jury instructions. Pegasystems Inc. v. Appian Corporation, Case No....more
After a Florida law firm and one of its attorneys (defendants) were hit with a $5 million jury verdict in a case arising out of an underlying medical malpractice action, they—along with the firm's insurer—appealed. Because...more
In the latest round of the Apple/VirnetX saga, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held to its precedents in determining when 35 USC § 317(b) estoppel is triggered against inter partes re-examinations. VirnetX...more
IPR Petitioner’s Initial Identification of the Real Parties in Interest Is to Be Accepted Unless and Until Disputed by a Patent Owner - In Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1481, -1546, -1583, the Federal...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The PTAB may initially accept an IPR petitioner’s identification of real-parties-in-interest, but...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before NEWMAN, CHEN, and HUGHES. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: In inter partes review, the patent challenger bears the burden of proving that proposed amended...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before Moore, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Summary: In challenging compliance with the marking requirement of §...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) gets most of its attention (judicial and otherwise) regarding its decisions in inter partes review and covered business method proceedings. But the Board also has responsibility for...more
In Nidec v. Zhongshan, the entire panel affirms a determination of obviousness but two judges question whether § 315(c) of the AIA was improperly used to permit joinder as to a second Zhongshan petition filed after the...more