PersonalWeb—the third appeal from a multidistrict litigation involving alleged infringement of PersonalWeb’s patents—addressed two issues: (1) whether the district court abused its discretion in finding the case exceptional...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s claim construction and related summary judgment rulings after determining that the district court erred in construing a claim term by...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a stipulated judgment of noninfringement in a patent infringement dispute after construing a disputed claim term, taking a more literal approach than the district court...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. FINJAN LLC V. SONICWALL, INC [OPINION] (22-1048, 10/13/2023) (Reyna, Bryson, and Cunningham) - Cunningham, J. The Court vacated the district court’s judgment of...more
Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2263, -2264, -2265, -2266 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2023) In an appeal from a stipulated judgment of noninfringement and invalidity following an adverse claim construction...more
Apple Inc. v. Vidal, Appeal No. 2022-1249 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 13, 2023) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit allowed Apple’s challenge to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) Fintiv rules to proceed, at least...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
The Federal Circuit has vacated and remanded a district court’s ruling of noninfringement because of erroneous claim construction that would leave the dependent claims of a patent with no scope. In Littelfuse, Inc. v....more
ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION v. MESO SCALE DIAGNOSTICS, LLC - Before Newman, Prost, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A finding of inducing infringement requires...more
Littelfuse, Inc. v. Mersen USA EP Corp., Appeal No. 2021-2013 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 4, 2022) - Our Case of the Week focuses on the issue of claim construction, and, more specifically, the doctrine of claim differentiation....more
Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, Appeal No. 2020-1441 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2021) - In this week’s Case of the Week, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered, and rejected, new...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the US Court of Federal Claims erred by failing to consider defendant’s non-compliance with the terms of an implied license, vacating the claims court’s finding of...more
TECSEC, INC., v. ADOBE INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: Even if it would be objectively reasonable to view a defendant’s conduct as...more
Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., 2019-1527, (Fed. Cir. Aug 27, 2020) - In an appeal from the District of Delaware, the Federal Circuit (Judges Moore, Plager, and Wallach) vacated and remanded the district court’s judgment...more
BAXALTA INC. V. GENENTECH, INC. Before Moore, Plager, and Wallach. Appeal from the District of Delaware Summary: A district court erred by interpreting a specification’s description of an “antibody” as a definition,...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Baxalta Inc. v. Genentech, Inc., Appeal No. 2019-1527 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 27, 2020) - In this week’s Case of the Week, an appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware,...more
Last month, in Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC v. Casper Sleep Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granting summary judgment of non-infringement to...more
Assignor Estoppel Does Not Apply in the IPR Context - In Arista Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-1525, 2017-1577, the Federal Circuit held that the plain language of 35 U.S.C. § 311(a) unambiguously...more
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 - Before Taranto, Plager, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington. Summary: A patent claim is directed to an abstract idea where it broadly recites a...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Moore and Reyna. Appeal from the District Court of Delaware. Summary: A limitation in the specification should not be imported into a claim when there is no evidence that the...more
Certain Access Control Systems and Components Thereof, Inv. No. 337-TA-1016 (May 31, 2017), is a good lesson in covering all your bases. Relying on a non-infringement decision by ALJ Pender, respondents assumed that they did...more
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Impression Products v. Lexmark will force patentees to get what they can in their initial sale or licensing of patented products in both the U.S. and abroad, knowing that they will have to rely...more
Dynamic 3D Geosolutions LLC v. Schlumberger Limited (No. 2015-1628, 9/12/16) (Lourie, Wallach, Hughes) - Lourie, J. Affirming disqualification of plaintiff's counsel and affirming dismissal of complaint. “We recognize...more
Mankes v. Vivid Seats Ltd. (No. 2015-1909, 4/22/16) (Taranto, Schall, Chen) - Taranto, J. Vacating judgment on the pleadings dismissing cases for inadequately pleading divided infringement and remanding for...more