Subscribe: LexisNexis® Mealey's™ Intellectual Property Pleadings Legal News
http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/rss/legalnews_intellectualpropertypleadings.xml
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade A rated
Language: English
Tags:
appeals  cir  circuit court  circuit  court appeals  court  federal circuit  federal  patent owner  patent  supreme court  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®



 



Halo, Pulse Again Square Off In Oral Arguments Before Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A dispute over an award of prejudgment interest in a longstanding dispute over patented transformer packaging was argued April 5 before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Halo Electronics Inc. v. Pulse Electronics Inc., No. 16-2006, Fed. Cir.).



Federal Circuit Hears Oral Arguments In Patent Ineligibility Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A determination that various claims of a patented method for providing and editing medical records are directed to patent-eligible subject matter was debated April 7 in oral arguments before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Preservation Wellness Technologies LLC v. Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc., No. 16-2193, Fed. Cir.).



PTO: PTAB Need Not Issue Final Decision On All Claims For Inter Partes Review
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An appellate court correctly held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) does not need to issue a final decision addressing the patentability of every claim identified in a petition for inter partes review (IPR), "including claims whose patentability the agency declined to review in the instituted proceeding," the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) director tells the U.S. Supreme Court in an April 5 response brief (SAS Institute Inc. v. Michelle K. Lee, director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and ComplementSoft LLC, No. 16-969, U.S. Sup.).



Appellant Tells Federal Circuit: No Fee Awards In Challenge Of Patent Rejections
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The applicability of the "American Rule" in disputes over a rejection of patent claims by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is currently before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Realvirt LLC v. Michelle K. Lee, Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 17-1159, Fed. Cir.).



Patent Defendant: Judge Erred In Undoing Jury's Verdict Of Invalidity
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A jury empanelled in Texas federal court correctly deemed various claims of two medical device patents invalid as anticipated and obvious, an infringement defendant recently argued to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Flexuspine Inc. v. Globus Medical Inc., Nos. 17-1188, -1189, Fed. Cir.).



Biologic Firm Urges Supreme Court To Reject Prenotice FDA Approval Requirement
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a March 31 brief, Sandoz Inc. tells the U.S. Supreme Court that rival biologic maker Amgen Inc. and the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals have improperly read a requirement into a federal biosimilar statute mandating Food and Drug Administration approval of a biologic license application prior to the statute's required 180-day premarketing notice (Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., et al.., No. 15-1039 and 15-1195, U.S. Sup.).



Samsung's Amicus Filers Back Obviousness Question In Patent Suit With Apple
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Nonprofit organizations for civil liberties filed an amicus curiae brief on April 10 in support of the U.S. Supreme Court deciding Samsung Electronics Co.'s petition on whether Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), require a court to hold patents obvious under 35 U.S. Code Section 103, "where the patents make at most trivial advances over technologies well-known to a person of skill in the art" (Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 16-1102, U.S. Sup.).



Megaupload Executives Ask High Court To Hear Foreign Asset Forfeiture Case
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In an April 7 petition for certiorari, former executives with now-defunct file-sharing service Megaupload ask the U.S. Supreme Court to hear arguments over the U.S. government's application of laws governing the forfeiture of foreign-held assets by those deemed to be fugitives avoiding prosecution, arguing that their assets were wrongly seized in conjunction with a novel, untested theory of criminal copyright infringement (Finn Batato, et al. v. United States of America, No. 16-1206, U.S. Sup.).



HBO Tells 9th Circuit 'Ballers' Copyright Suit Was Properly Dismissed
SAN FRANCISCO - Home Box Office Inc. (HBO) and others connected with the television show "Ballers" argue in an April 3 Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals appellee brief that the series is not substantially similar to a copyrighted work of two California writers, seeking affirmance of a trial court order dismissing the infringement suit (Everette Silas, et al. v. Home Box Office Inc., et al., No. 16-56215, 9th Cir.).



Usenet Provider Opposes 9th Circuit Rehearing Over Vicarious Liability
PASADENA, Calif. - A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel correctly found that it was not liable for its users' posting of copyrighted adult pictures, a usenet service provider asserts in an April 10 brief opposing an adult entertainment firm's petition for rehearing, arguing that the panel applied the correct standard for determining vicarious liability (Perfect 10 Inc. v. Giganews Inc., et al., No. 15-55500, 15-55523 and 15-56026, 9th Cir.).



Plastics Firms Debate Attorney Fees Award In 8th Circuit Trademark Appeal
ST. LOUIS - On a second appeal before the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals regarding the ownership of a trademark connected with plastic products in the poultry field, two plastic manufacturing companies filed briefs arguing whether an Iowa federal judge properly clarified an earlier ruling on remand and awarded attorney fees under state law based on the defendant's harassment of the plaintiff (East Iowa Plastics Inc. v. PI Inc., No. 16-4574, 8th Cir.).



Trade Dress, Trademark Protection Of Light Installations Debated In 8th Circuit
ST. LOUIS - An artist known for light installations and a one-time potential client have filed briefs in the Eighth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, debating whether a trial court properly dismissed the artist's trade dress and trademark claims over a purported lookalike, and similarly-named, display as preempted by copyright law (Bruce Munro, et al. v. Lucy Activewear Inc., et al., No. 16-4483, 8th Cir.).



Samsung Raises Obvious Question To High Court In Patent Suit With Apple
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Samsung Electronics Co. in a March 10 petition for writ of certiorari asks the U.S. Supreme Court if Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1 (1966), and KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., 550 U.S. 398 (2007), require a court to hold patents obvious under 35 U.S. Code Section 103, "where the patents make at most trivial advances over technologies well-known to a person of skill in the art" (Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al. v. Apple Inc., No. 16-1102, U.S. Sup.).



Cox Seeks High Court Review Of General Rule In Patent Definiteness Analysis
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a patent infringement dispute with Sprint Communications Co. LP, Cox Communications Inc. and its entities ask the U.S. Supreme Court in a March 13 petition if the general rule that each element in a patent claim is material to the invention's scope applies to analysis of a claim's definiteness under 35 U.S. Code Section 112 (Cox Communications Inc., et al. v. Sprint Communications Company LP, et al., No. 16-1106, U.S. Sup.).



Medtronic Seeks High Court Review Of PTAB Decision On Jurisdiction Under APA
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Medtronic Inc. asked the U.S. Supreme Court in a March 17 petition whether a federal district court has jurisdiction to decide a claim under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) challenging "as arbitrary and capricious, contrary to law, and contrary to due process" a final Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision terminating already-instituted inter partes reviews (IPR) on grounds unrelated to the patent merits (Medtronic Inc. v. Michelle K. Lee, Director, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, No. 16, 1138, Medtronic Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems Inc., No. 16-1139, U.S. Sup.).



Trash Bag Maker Asks High Court To Review Limitation Imposed On Patent Claim
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A manufacturer of trash bags in a March 16 petition asks the U.S. Supreme Court to answer whether a court can "impose a limitation on a patent claim that is contrary to the claim's plain meaning, based on the court's inferences from the patent's specification and prosecution history" (Poly-America L.P. v. API Industries Inc., No. 16-1123, U.S. Sup.).



Patent Owner Asks High Court If Diehr Can Be 'Harmonized' With Alice
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A patent owner in a March 10 petition asks the U.S. Supreme Court to decide whether and to what extent Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981), which "confirms that patents directed to the acquisition of data are directed to patent-eligible subject matter, can be harmonized" with the decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2354 (2014) (Concaten Inc. v. AmeriTrak Fleet Solutions LLC, No. 16-1109, U.S. Sup.).



Obviousness-Type Double Patenting Case Proceeds To Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A dispute over various claims of a monoclonal antibody patent that were invalidated on the basis of obviousness-type double patenting was recently briefed before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Janssen Biotech Inc. v. Celltrion Healthcare Co. Ltd., No. 17-1120, Fed. Cir.).



Federal Circuit To Hear Patent Dispute Over Colitis Drug In May
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a March 21 docket entry, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals announced that it will hear a patent dispute over a planned generic drug for the treatment of colitis on May 1 (Shire Development LLC, et al. v. Cadila Healthcare Ltd., d/b/a Zydus Cadila, et al., No. 17-1048, Fed. Cir.).



University Seeks Review Of Invalidation By Board Of Anomaly Detector Patent
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Findings by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board that various claims of a patented anomaly detector are unpatentable as anticipated and obvious were erroneous, the trustees of Columbia University recently told the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Trustees of Columbia University v. Symantec Corp., Nos. 16-2551, -2554, -2630 and -2631, Fed. Cir.).



Tossed $200 Million Patent Verdict Debated Before Federal Circuit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A California federal judge's decision to nullify a $200 million jury award on behalf of a prevailing patent infringement plaintiff under the doctrine of unclean hands was erroneous, the patent owner recently argued to the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Gilead Sciences Inc. v. Merck & Co. Inc., No. 16-2302, Fed. Cir.).



Software Support Firm Appeals $41.2M Jury Verdict In Oracle Copyright Suit
SAN FRANCISCO - Appealing a $41.2 million jury verdict in a copyright infringement suit, a software support company argues in a March 10 reply brief to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that licenses by Oracle USA Inc. "expressly authorize third-party support and the copies necessary to provide it" and that it was authorized access to download support materials (Oracle USA Inc., et al. v. Rimini Street Inc. and Seth Ravin, Nos. 16-16-832 & 16-16905, 9th Cir.).



Record Label Says 'Empire' Trademark Infringement Falls Into Exception Of Rogers
SAN FRANCISCO - A record label argues to the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in its March 15 reply brief that Rogers v. Grimaldi, 875 F.2d 994, 997 (2d Cir. 1989), does not govern the infringement of its trademarks by television companies because their use of a mark in the title of a television series and music soundtracks falls within an exception to Rogers (Twentieth Century Fox Television, et al. v. Empire Distribution Inc., No. 16-55577, 9th Cir.).



Firearms Dealer: Heightened Scrutiny For Denial Of Jury Trial In Trademark Suit
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a trademark dispute over a profits claim, a firearms dealer argues to the U.S. Supreme Court in a March 15 reply brief that when a party clearly intends to pursue a jury trial, "heightened scrutiny applies to a district court's denial of that right" (Clyde Armory Inc. v. FN Herstal S.A., No. 16-936, U.S. Sup.).



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.).