News & Analysis as of

Software › Indefiniteness › Patent Infringement

McDermott Will & Emery

“Payment Handler”: A Nonce Term Without Instructions

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s ruling that a software term was a “nonce” term that invoked 35 U.S.C. § 112, sixth paragraph (i.e., a means-plus-function claim element). The Court...more

Knobbe Martens

Distribution of Software Alone Does Not Infringe a Claim That Requires Hardware

Knobbe Martens on

SYNCHRONOSS TECHNOLOGIES, INC v. DROPBOX, INC. Before Prost, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: A claim construed to require hardware does not...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Indefiniteness of Means-Plus-Function Claims

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing both the circumstances that lead to a claim limitation invoking a means-plus-function construction and indefiniteness issues for means-plus-function claims, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC (Fed. Cir. 2015)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

On September 23, 2010, Eon filed suit against seventeen defendants in the District Court of the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,663,757. During the case, the '757 patent went through two...more

4 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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide