Archive for 'Litigation'
Written By: Sunjeev S. Sikand This article appeared in theSeptember 25, 2014 Edition of IP Law 360 At the heart of nearly every patent litigation is a dispute over the meaning of claim terms. Such disputes often arise in the form of a claim definiteness challenge by the accused infringer. Recently, in Nautilus v. Biosig1, [...]
Written By: Sunjeev S. Sikand This article appeared in the July 22, 2014 Edition of IP Law 360 In proceedings before the Patent Trial & Appeal Board, whether a reference is publicly accessible and therefore qualifies as a prior art printed publication depends on the "facts and circumstances surrounding the reference’s disclosure to members of [...]
Triton Tech v. Nintendo: How Specific Must a Disclosure be About an Algorithm Before it Provides Structure Sufficient For a Means-Plus-Function Claim?
Written By: Derek Richmond This article first appeared in the July 8, 2014 Edition of IP Law 360 Over the last few years, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) has held that a means-plus-function term in a claim relating a computer implemented invention must be supported by a corresponding structure, which can [...]
Supreme Court’s Alice Decision Strikes a Blow Against Patent Trolls in Confirming that Adding the Words “Apply It With A Computer” Does Not Make an Abstract Idea Patentable
Written By: Thomas G. Southard, Christopher H. Blaszkowski A unanimous Supreme Court today ruled that software patents based on abstract ideas that merely require generic computer implementation are ineligible for patent protection, affirming the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s recent en banc decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l. This ruling [...]
Federal Circuit Issues Trilogy of Precedential Orders on Inter Partes Review Under the America Invents Act
Written By: Bruce T. Wieder SUMMARY On April 24, 2014, the Federal Circuit issued three precedential orders. The orders relate to two cases that sought to require the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) to initiate inter partes reviews of patents and one case that sought to require the Board to withdraw orders initiating inter [...]
Posted: April 25th, 2014 under Litigation.
Written By: Jonathan H. Spadt RatnerPrestia enhanced its litigation practice with the addition of 5 new litigation attorneys over the past year. Strengthening its litigation resources is a focus for the new year and one that the firm is presenting with a very pragmatic approach. “We understand the challenges of managing and controlling IP litigation [...]
Posted: February 16th, 2014 under Litigation.
Washington, D.C. | February 2014 – On January 31, 2014, patent infringement claims asserted against Freixenet USA, Inc. in the Eastern District of Texas were dismissed with prejudice by plaintiff Lamina Packaging Innovations, LLC. This comes after Freixenet’s hard-fought victory over Lamina in the International Trade Commission (ITC) in late 2013.
Written By: Lisa A. Mead In an opinion issued on January 15, 2014 in Novartis AG v. Lee (Fed. Cir., 2014), the Federal Circuit changed how patent term adjustment (PTA) determinations are to be calculated. Several months of additional PTA may now be added to a patent term if a Request for Continued Examination (RCE) [...]
Federal Circuit Takes a Swipe at Baseless Patent Litigation | Easing Burden for Recovering Fees Shows Court’s Willingness to Address Litigation Abuse
Written By: Brian. P. O’Shaughnessy The debate over patent litigation abuse, and its effect on innovation and our economy, continues to rage. Various interests, and now members of Congress, argue that immediate action in the form of legislation is needed. Those intimately involved in the daily administration of our patent system, however, urge caution, saying [...]
Written By: Bruce T. Wieder SUMMARY On December 26, the Federal Circuit made it easier for a defendant in a patent infringement suit to recover attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. In Kilopass Technology, Inc. v. Sidense Corp., the court ruled that although recovery of attorneys’ fees requires a showing that “(1) the litigation [...]