Latest Posts › Patent Infringement

Share:

Attorney Fees Denied Due to Lack of Support in Cannabis Litigation Record

In 2018, United Cannabis Corporation (“UCANN”) sued Pure Hemp Collective (“Pure Hemp”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,730,911 (the “‘911 patent”), entitled “Cannabis Extracts and Methods of Preparing and Using the...more

Do Employees Working from Home Impact Venue in Patent Litigation?

In patent infringement cases, venue is proper under 28 U.S.C § 1406(a) where either (1) the company accused of infringement is incorporated or (2) where the company has committed acts of infringement and has a “regular and...more

AI Systems May Invent, But Are They Inventors?

Previously, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) has found that a non-human may infringe patents. Arguably, an AI system, which is a non-human, can also create or invent. But can an AI system be a...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies Standards for Willful Patent Infringement and Enhanced Damages

Willful patent infringement can result in enhanced, and in some case treble, damages but not in every instance. Because the standard for finding willful infringement has traditionally been lower than that for enhancing...more

Juries Will Play Role In Some Questions Of Patent Eligibility

In ruling on motions to dismiss and motions for summary judgment, courts have found a number of patents ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as a matter of law. However, in Berkheimer v. HP, the Court of Appeals for the Federal...more

Can The U.S. Government Be Liable For Patent Infringement?

The answer is “Yes” because the U.S. government has waived sovereign immunity for claims of patent infringement. This means the U.S. government can be sued for patent infringement in at least some instances. However,...more

No Judicial Estoppel In The Case Of The On-Again, Off-Again Patent Inventor

The case of Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc. raised the question of whether inventors named on a patent can be repeatedly changed as litigation strategy changes. Because of judicial estoppel, the district court said no...more

Google’s Servers Do Not Constitute A Regular And Established Place Of Business For Patent Venue

It has become commonplace for companies such as Google to use local servers to provide faster service to customers. This practice has raised the question as to whether those local servers constitute “a regular and...more

Online Gaming Case Addresses Trigger For One-Year IPR Filing Deadline

When sued for patent infringement, a defendant can still petition for inter partes review (“IPR”) of the asserted patent at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) if the petition is filed within one year of...more

Federal Circuit Invalidates Garage Door Opener Patent Because It Is An Abstract Idea

Have you ever driven away from your home and then had that irritating doubt in your mind as to whether you remembered to close your garage door? I know I have. No matter how hard I try to search my brain’s archives, I really...more

Can Secret Sales Prohibit Patenting Your Invention?

Prior to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), the patent statute (35 U.S.C. § 102(b)) prohibited patenting an invention that was “on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for...more

IP Challenges Again Take The Stage At The U.S. Supreme Court

Intellectual property disputes will again take their place on stage at the U.S. Supreme Court this term when the court addresses at least two IP questions. 1. Can the government challenge patents under the America Invents...more

The Supreme Court: Cases To Watch And Missed Opportunities

In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court has considered a number of intellectual property and related cases, but many issues remain unresolved. Therefore, it is important to look both at the cases currently before the U.S....more

Patent Litigation Venues: Is A Computer Server Room Really A Place Of Business?

The U.S. Supreme Court’s in TC Heartland v. Kraft Food, and subsequently the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re Cray Inc., addressed where patent litigation can be filed under the patent venue statute, 28...more

Recovery of Lost Foreign Profits for Infringement of a U.S. Patent

While a U.S. patent provides the patent owner with a monopoly to prevent others from “making, using, offering for sale, or selling the invention throughout the United States,” there are significant limits to the...more

New ITC Rules For Patent Infringement Cases: Adding Fuel To The Ultimate Rocket Docket

The United States International Trade Commission (“ITC”) is a Federal agency that deals with matters involving trade. Among its many responsibilities, the ITC investigates a variety of issues related to trade including...more

USPTO Proposes Change In Claim Construction Standard For PTAB Proceedings Under The AIA

Currently, the standard for claim construction is different in AIA reviews before the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (“USPTO”) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB) than in proceedings in federal district courts...more

Federal Circuit Clarifies Venue Requirements For Patent Cases

Until the U.S. Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017 ruling in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the United States district courts had interpreted the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C....more

Did The Supreme Court Just Close The Door On Eastern District Of Texas Patent Plaintiffs?

For over 25 years, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the United States district courts have interpreted the patent venue statute 28 U.S.C. §1400(b) to allow plaintiffs to bring patent infringement cases against...more

One Is Not Enough for Patent Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. §271(f)(1)

In Life Technologies v. Promega Corporation, the U.S. Supreme Court addressed whether supplying a single component from the United States of a multicomponent invention assembled abroad constitutes patent infringement under 35...more

Federal Circuit Requires Standing to Appeal PTAB’s Final Decisions

Although arguably foreshadowed, some may be surprised to learn that a party with the right to challenge the validity of a patent at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) may not have the right to appeal an...more

The Federal Circuit Finds Foreign Sales Do Not Exhaust Patent Rights

In Lexmark International, Inc. v. Impression Products, Inc., No. 14-1617 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided en banc that a U.S. patent owner’s “first sale” of items in a foreign...more

22 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