|
|
|
05.05.2015
|
www.mckoolsmith.com
| View in web browser
|
 |
Appeal of Decision on Stay Motion Relating to Covered Business Method Patent Reviews Only Permitted After the Proceeding is Actually Instituted by the PTO
Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. JP Morgan Chase & Co.
JP Morgan moved to stay the patent litigation brought against it by IV based on its representation that it intended to file petitions seeking covered business method patent reviews of four of the five patents-in-suit. Read More >>
|
Court Affirms Reasonable Royalty Damages Award of 50% of the Infringer’s Gross Profits
Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Corp.
In a case involving only the issue of the amount of damages to award Astra for infringement of patents directed to Astra’s Prilosec drug, the district court, in a bench trial, awarded Astra 50% of Apotex’s gross margin... Read More >>
|
 |
 |
Court Rejects Sandoz’s Obviousness Arguments, Upholding the Validity of Claims Directed to Treating Ocular Infections
Insite Vision Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that defendant Sandoz had not proven obviousness by clear and convincing evidence. Read More >>
|
Court Reverses Claim Construction for the term “Transmit” Where the Specification was not Limited to the Manner of Transmission Required in the Improper Construction
Info-Hold, Inc. v. Applied Media Technologies Corporation
The Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s claim constructions and thus reversed the entry of judgment of non-infringement. Read More >>
|
 |
 |
Court Vacates and Remands District Court Decision to not Award Fees in Case Where District Court Found Significant Litigation Misconduct by the Plaintiff
Oplus Technologies, Ltd. v. Vizio, Inc.
Following the grant of summary judgment of non-infringement, defendant sought to recover its attorney’s fees under 35 U.S.C. Section 285, 28 U.S.C. Section 1928, and the court’s inherent powers due to significant litigation misconduct by the plaintiff. Read More >>
|
Federal Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment of Anticipation Where the Patentee Was Unable to Demonstrate that Substituting the Prior Art Range of a Claimed Ingredient Would Cause the Properties of the Claimed Substance to Differ
Ineos USA LLC v. Berry Plastics Corporation
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary of anticipation. The claim at issue required a range of amounts for a particular ingredient. Read More >>
|
Federal Circuit Could Not Hear Patentee’s Challenge to the PTO’s Refusal to Terminate Pending Reexamination Proceedings
Automated Merchandising Systems, Inc. v. Lee
The Federal Circuit held that it could not hear the patentees’ challenge to the PTO’s refusal to terminate pending reexaminations because the PTO’s refusal is
not a “final agency action” under Section 704 of the Administrative Procedure Act. Read More >>
|
 |
 |
On Remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit Finds Claim Term Not Indefinite Under the “Reasonable Certainty” Test
Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc.
Previously, the Supreme Court held, in the Biosig case, that the Federal Circuit’s standard for determining indefiniteness (a claim is indefinite when it is not amenable to construction or insolubly ambiguous) was incorrect. Read More >>
|
Summary Judgment of No Damages for Infringement Reversed Where There Was Evidence in the Record on Which the Patentee Could Rely to Show a Non-Zero Royalty
Info-Hold, Inc. v. Muzak LLC
The Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of summary judgment of no damages for infringement. Read More >>
|
 |
 |
Use of the Words “Refers to” in a Specification or Prosecution History Shows An Intention to Define a Claim Term
Vasudevan Software, Inc. v. Microstrategy, Inc.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s construction of the term “disparate databases,”
which was based on the patentee’s statement in the prosecution history that the “disparate nature of the above databases refers to an absence of compatible keys. . .” Read More >>
|
|
