Subscribe: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News
http://feeds.feedburner.com/IntellectualPropertyPleadingsLegalNews
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
circuit court  circuit  court appeals  court  federal circuit  federal  patent owner  patent  supreme court  supreme  washington 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News

LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News



Headline Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News from LexisNexis®



 



Amgen Asserts No Error In Requiring Approval Before 180-Day Notice
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Amgen Inc. filed its opening and response brief on March 10 in its high-stakes suit with Sandoz Inc., arguing that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals did not err by requiring biosimilar makers to get approval before supplying 180-day notice of sales to rivals because permitting notice before approval is consistent with "early resolution of patent disputes" (Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd., No. 15-1039, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner Asks Court To Consider Mayo/Alice Steps For 'Abstract Idea'
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A patent owner in a Feb. 28 petition for writ of certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to decide if patent claims directed to concrete and tangible inventions, "which are neither directed to a mathematical algorithm nor a business method," are eligible subject matter under step one of the framework in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012), and Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014) (Affinity Labs of Texas LLC v. Amazon.com Inc. and Amazon Digital Services Inc., No. 16-1047, U.S. Sup.).



High Court Asked By Patent Owner To Review 'Abstract Idea' Under Mayo / Alice
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Noting that the U.S. Supreme has found the "abstract idea" exception to 35 U.S. Code Section 101 to be a doctrine of restraint, a patent owner asks the court in a Feb. 27 petition to address whether patent claims directed to concrete and tangible inventions, "which are neither directed to a mathematical algorithm nor a business method," are eligible subject matter under step one of the framework in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012), and Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014) (Affinity Labs of Texas LLC v. DIRECTTV LLC, et al., No. 16-1046, U.S. Sup.).



Kraft Argues Congress' 'Residence' Definition Included In Patent Venue Statute
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Congress has defined "residence" "[f]or all venue purposes" and "venue" to include the patent venue statute, Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC argues in a March 1 respondent brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, further asserting that this definition is the controlling one and, thus, a defendant resides in the District of Delaware for a patent infringement suit (TC Heartland LLC d/b/a Heartland Food Products Group v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner Appeals Noninfringement Judgment To Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Following a July 2016 decision that upheld a preliminary injunction in favor of a patent owner, a subsequent appeal by the patent owner of a final judgment of noninfringement rendered in the same case will also soon be argued before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc. and Apotex Corp., No. 17-1010, Fed. Cir.).



Patent Owner Tells Federal Circuit Rejection By Board Was Error
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board's decision to affirm some rejections while reversing the non-rejection of other claims of a remote monitoring system and method patent should be vacated, patent owner Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems Inc. recently argued to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems Inc. v. Medtronic Inc., No. 17-1031, Fed. Cir.).



Appellant Tells Federal Circuit Texas Judge Erred In Claim Construction
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Decisions by a Texas federal judge to grant a summary judgment of noninfringement and award of attorney fees and costs in a patent dispute were erroneous, a patent owner recently told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Mark N. Chaffin v. Michael R. Braden and LBC Manufacturing, No. 16-2572, Fed. Cir.).



Dispute Over Priority Determinations Briefed Before Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals is poised to hear a patent dispute that an appellant recently argued "raises important legal questions regarding the statutory and regulatory scheme for determining priority" (Droplets Inc. v. E*Trade Bank, et al., Nos. 16-2504 & 16-2602, Fed. Cir.).



Firearms Distributor Opposes Review On Denial Of Profits Claim In Trademark Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A manufacturer and distributor of firearms argues in a Feb. 27 brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should decline review on whether a district court's refusal to allow amendment of a proposed pretrial order to assert a profits claim was an abuse of discretion (Clyde Armory Inc. v. FN Herstal S.A., No. 16-936, U.S. Sup.).



Manufacturer Asks Supreme Court To Decide If Copyright Act Preempts State Law Claim
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A manufacturer of butterfly valves on March 8 petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to answer whether Section 301(a) of the Copyright Act preempts state law claims relating to ideas expressed in tangible media (Ultraflo Corp. v. Pelican Tank Parts Inc., et al., No. 16-1085, U.S. Sup.).



Musician Asks High Court To Decide Claim Preclusion Use In Copyright Lawsuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A musician in a Feb. 20 petition for writ of certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to answer if "claim preclusion, a non-statutory defense is available without restriction to bar all remedies for civil copyright claims filed within the three-year statute of limitations prescribed by Congress, [17 U.S. Code Section 507(b)], 17 U.S.C. § 507(b)" (Syl Johnson v. UMG Recordings Inc., et al., No. 16-1052, U.S. Sup.).



Record Labels Says Split Exists On If DMCA Immunity Applies For Pre-1972 Sound Recordings
WASHINGTON, D.C. - There is a split between federal and state courts on whether the safe harbor protections from copyright infringement liability that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), 17 U.S. Code Section 512(c), provides for internet service providers also apply to sound recordings from before 1972, record labels argue in their March 7 reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court (Capitol Records LLC, et al. v. Vimeo LLC, et al., No. 16-771, U.S. Sup.).



Accused File-Sharer Calls Declaratory Judgment Counterclaim Useful
CINCINNATI - Even though a copyright holder dismissed its infringement claim against him, a man accused of downloading adult movies tells the Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a March 10 reply brief that his declaratory judgment counterclaim should proceed because a continued threat of liability exists (Malibu Media LLC v. David Ricupero, No. 16-3628, 6th Cir.).



Sandoz To High Court: Error To Require Approval Before 180-Day Notice
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a Feb. 10 opening brief in its high-stakes suit with Amgen Inc., Sandoz Inc. argues that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred by forcing biosimilar makers to get approval before supplying 180-day notice of sales to rivals because permitting notice before approval is consistent with "early resolution of patent disputes" (Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc. and Amgen Manufacturing Ltd., No. 15-1039, U.S. Sup.).



Lexmark: Exhaustion Doctrine Allows Patentees To Modify Sale To Convey Authority
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The exhaustion doctrine allows patentees and buyers "to tailor a sale to convey only the authority the buyer wants to pay for," Lexmark International Inc. argues in a Feb. 16 response brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, further saying that nothing requires that every sale of a patented article convey full authority under the patent (Impression Products Inc. v. Lexmark International Inc., No. 15-1189, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner Says Restriction Of 'Common Sense' Ruling Does Not Conflict With KSR
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court should not review a petition asking whether the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in restricting the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's ability to rely on the common sense and common knowledge of skilled artisans to establish the obviousness of patent claims, a patent owner argues in a Feb. 10 brief, because the ruling does not conflict with KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 415 (2007) (Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC v. Arendi S.A.R.L., et al., No. 16-626, U.S. Sup.).



Law Professors, Attorneys Support Clarification Of Eligibility Under Diehr/Alice
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Fifteen law professors and two patent attorneys filed briefs on Feb. 16 in support of a patent owner's petition to the U.S. Supreme Court asking whether a patent for a software-implemented industrial process that regulates and controls the operation of an oil rig, which was patent eligible under 35 U.S. Code Section 101 in Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981), can be rendered patent ineligible by Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014) (TDE Petroleum Data Solutions Inc. v. AKM Enterprise Inc. and DBA Mobilize Inc., No. 16-890, U.S. Sup.).



Geophysical Services Company Seeks Review On Lost Profits In Patent Infringement Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A geophysical services company on Feb. 17 petitioned for writ of certiorari asking the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether an appellate court erred in holding that lost profits arising from prohibited combinations of components for a patented invention occurring outside of the United States "are categorically unavailable in cases where patent infringement is proven" under 35 U.S. Code Section 271(f) (WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., No. 16-1011, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Dispute Over Low Testosterone Treatment Briefed For Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An Indiana federal judge erred in deeming two patents covering a "breakthrough" treatment for hypogonadism invalid, the patent owners recently told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Eli Lilly and Company, et al., v. Perrigo Company, et al., Nos. 2016-2555, -2614, Fed. Cir.).



Patent Owner Appeals Adverse Inter Partes Review To Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board committed legal error when it misinterpreted a homonym while construing the claim term "determining a power factor," a patent owner recently told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Pentair Water Spa and Pool Inc. v. Hayward Industries Inc., No. 16-2598, Fed. Cir.).



Adobe Argues: California Final Judgment Of Patent Invalidity Should Stand
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An appellant who saw its online transactional patent rejected by a California federal judge recently appealed the ruling to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, asserting errors in the district court's handling of the patent's priority date (Collaborative Agreements LLC, d/b/a Oui Agree v. Adobe Systems Inc., No. 16-2560, Fed. Cir.).



Validity Of Root Canal File Patent Disputed On Appeal To Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An August 2016 ruling by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that invalidated all claims of a patented process for reducing the superelasticity of endodontic files was erroneous, the patent owner recently told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Gold Standard Instruments LLC v. U.S. Endodontics LLC, No. 16-2597, Fed. Cir.).



Patent Dispute Over Polymerization Process Heads To Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred not only while construing a disputed phrase in a patented polymerization process but also in holding that the patent challenger failed to establish obviousness, an appellant recently argued to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (SNF Holding Company v. BASF Corporation, No. 16-2565, Fed. Cir.).



Med Tech Company Opposes Review Of Overturned $340M Antitrust Award
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a dispute over entitlement to a treble damages award for attempted monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, a medical technology company argues in a Feb. 15 brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that there is no evidence that its alleged false advertising harmed competition or that it "tainted" the market by selling a flawed product (Retractable Technologies Inc. and Thomas Shaw v. Becton Dickinson & Co., No. 16-953, U.S. Sup.).



Amicus Curiae Filers Support Supreme Court Review Of Intervest In Copyright Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a dispute over an architectural floor plan, amicus curiae filers who are involved in the development, creation and marketing of "architectural works" in a Feb. 6 brief argue in support of the U.S. Supreme Court considering a petition to decide if Intervest Construction Inc. v. Canterbury Estate Homes Inc. should be overruled in light of conflicting precedent from other appellate courts, which hold that architectural works are entitled to the same protection as other copyrightable, original works under the Federal Copyright Act (Home Design Services Inc. v. Turner Heritage Homes Inc., et al., No. 16-858, U.S. Sup.).



Video-Sharing Site Opposes Review On DMCA Immunity For Pre-1972 Sound Recordings
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A video-sharing website argues in a Feb. 16 opposition brief that the U.S. Supreme Court should not decide whether the safe harbor protections from copyright infringement liability that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), 17 U.S. Code Section 512(c), provides for internet service providers apply to sound recordings from before 1972 (Capitol Records LLC, et al. v. Vimeo LLC, et al., No. 16-771, U.S. Sup.).



VidAngel Tells 9th Circuit Studios Do Not Have Exclusive Streaming Rights
SAN FRANCISCO - Defending its right to stream "filtered" copies of movies for its customers in a Feb. 22 reply brief in the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, VidAngel Inc. argues that it has not violated any of the movie studio plaintiffs' exclusive rights under the Copyright Act (Disney Enterprises Inc., et al. v. VidAngel Inc., No. 16-56843, 9th Cir.).



Company Tells High Court To Keep Interpretation On Venue Statutes In Patent Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A producer and supplier of liquid water enhancers and zero calorie sweeteners argues in a Jan. 30 brief to the U.S. Supreme Court that its interpretation of the statutory phrase "the judicial district where the defendant resides" "mean[s] the state of incorporation only" and that the venue is "not to be supplemented" by other provisions (TC Heartland LLC d/b/a Heartland Food Products Group v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, No. 16-341, U.S. Sup.).



Software Developer Asks High Court To Abandon PTO's Review Procedures
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court should review an appellate court ruling that the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) final decision in an inter partes review (IPR) did not need to address every challenged patent claim but rather only some, an analytic software developer says in a Jan. 31 petition (SAS Institute Inc. v. Michelle K. Lee, director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and ComplementSoft LLC, No. 16-969, U.S. Sup.).



Oil Services Company Tells High Court To Deny Review On IPR's Constitutionality
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In response to a petition asking for a U.S. Supreme Court decision on whether inter partes review (IPR) violates the U.S. Constitution, an oilfield services company argues in a Jan. 30 opposition brief that the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals "has repeatedly and correctly rejected the argument that the Constitution prohibits the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) from correcting its own error in issuing a patent that fails the statutory requirements" (Oil States Energy Services LLC v. Greene's Energy Group LLC, No. 16-712, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner: Rehearing Of Federal Circuit Summary Affirmance Is Warranted
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A January affirmance without opinion of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a dispute over the results of an inter partes review should be reheard, the patent owner told the Federal Circuit Feb. 9 (Leak Surveys Inc. v. FLIR Systems Inc., Nos. 16-1299, -1300, Fed. Cir.).



Drug Maker Tells Federal Circuit Ruling Invalidating Velcade Patent Was Error
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on Feb. 6 heard oral arguments in a dispute over the cancer-fighting prodrug Velcade, following findings in 2015 by a Delaware federal judge that the patent covering the pharmaceutical composition is invalid (Millennium Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Sandoz Inc., et al., Nos. 2015-2066, 2016-1008, -1009, -1010, -1109, -1110, -1283, Fed. Cir.).



Firearms Seller Seeks Review Over Denial To Assert Profits Claim In Trademark Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A seller and distributor of firearms, in a trademark infringement lawsuit, petitioned on Jan. 25 for writ of certiorari to ask the U.S. Supreme Court whether a district court's refusal to allow it to amend a proposed pretrial order to assert a profits claim was an abuse of discretion (Clyde Armory Inc. v. FN Herstal S.A., No. 16-936, U.S. Sup.).



Company Seeks High Court Review Of Res Judicata Ruling Under B&B Hardware
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A software company in a Jan. 18 petition for writ of certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether the Fifth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals is bound by B&B Hardware Inc. v. Hargis Industries Inc., 135 S.Ct. 1293 (2015), "in a trademark declaratory action brought solely to relitigate the likelihood of confusion issue after the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board had already rendered a final judgment determining likelihood of confusion" (M2 Software Inc. v. M2 Technology Inc., No. 16-909, U.S. Sup.).



Belmora Argues Courts Recognize Limits To Suing For Trademark Cancellation
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a Feb. 8 reply brief, Belmora LLC argues to the U.S. Supreme Court that courts "generally recognized that the principle of territoriality imposed a real limit on who could sue for cancellation of a trademark or unfair competition under the Lanham Act" (Belmora LLC and Jamie Belcastro v. Bayer Consumer Care AG, et al., No. 16-548, U.S. Sup.).



Alumni Association: 1st Amendment Bars Trademark Case Over Use Of Name
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an alumni association from trademark infringement claims in connection with its use of the words "alumni association" in conjunction with the university's name, the alumni association argues in its Jan. 30 reply brief to the U.S. Supreme Court, because it cannot identify who its members are without using the university's name (Alumni Association of New Jersey Institute of Technology v. New Jersey Institute of Technology, No. 16-798, U.S. Sup.).



Home Builders: High Court Should Deny Review Of Intervest In Copyright Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a dispute over an architectural floor plan, home builders in a Feb. 6 brief respond that the U.S. Supreme Court should not consider whether Intervest Construction Inc. v. Canterbury Estate Homes Inc. should be overruled because architectural works are protectable under the Copyright Act but that protection is limited by statute (Home Design Services Inc. v. Turner Heritage Homes Inc., et al., No. 16-858, U.S. Sup.).



Oracle Appeals Java Fair Use Ruling To Federal Circuit In Google Copyright Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a Feb. 10 appellant brief in the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, Oracle America Inc. asserts error in a trial court's finding that Google Inc.'s copying of certain elements of its Java technology constituted fair use, arguing that the court failed to consider Google's misrepresentations and harm to the Java market (Oracle America Inc. v. Google Inc., No. 17-1118 and 17-1202, Fed. Cir.).



Video-Streaming Firm's Filtering Service Violates DMCA, Studios Tell 9th Circuit
SAN FRANCISCO - Several movie studios tell the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in a Feb. 8 appellee brief that a video-streaming service provider blatantly violated the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) by circumventing the technological protection measures (TPMs) on DVD and Blu-ray copies of their movies to offer edited versions to customers, also arguing that the defendant's defenses under the Family Movie Act (FMA) are incompatible with that statute's purposes (Disney Enterprises Inc., et al. v. VidAngel Inc., No. 16-56843, 9th Cir.).



University, Publishers Argue Fair Use In Electronic Works Posting In 11th Circuit
ATLANTA - On the second appeal regarding the alleged copyright infringement of educational materials by electronic posting of their excerpts by Georgia State University (GSU) faculty, the university argues in a Feb. 6 appellee brief that a trial court judge correctly determined fair use of the works at issue by finding that the postings had not led to market substitution of the works (Cambridge University Press, et al. v. Georgia State University, et al., No. 16-15726, 11th Cir.).