Posts in Federal Circuit Review


Samsung Succeeds in Reducing Damages for Infringement of Two Rembrandt Patents

Rembrandt sued Samsung for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas and convinced a jury that Samsung infringed its two asserted patents, awarding $15.7 million in damages. …

Refusal to institute IPR based on reference does not preclude use of reference for motivation to combine

The Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) decision finding a patent owned by Novartis AG and Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corp. (collectively “Novartis”) to …

Federal Circuit says Rule 36 Judgments can have Preclusive Effect

A Federal Circuit Rule 36 judgment can be a valid and final judgment for purposes of preclusive effects. Additionally, district court findings affirmed by a Rule 36 judgment can …

Federal Circuit affirms ruling that Apple does not infringe Core Wireless’ Patent

Core Wireless sued Apple for infringing its patent directed to a cellular network system including a mobile station providing for improved transmission of data packets. The jury …

If patent owner intends a special meaning, clear disavowal of ordinary meaning required

If the patent owner intends claim terms to have a special meaning, the patent must provide a clear disavowal of ordinary meaning or an alternative lexicography. Otherwise, …

Mylan’s proposed ANDA drug does not infringe MedCo patents

A claim term can be limited to an embodiment described in the specification, if the claim would otherwise be found invalid and the embodiment was not disclaimed. …

Federal Court validity decisions do not bind the PTAB

On appeal, Novartis argued that the PTAB unlawfully reached different conclusions than the Federal Circuit and U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware in addressing …

CAFC: A reference that requires significant modification will not anticipate and invalidate that claim

The Federal Circuit noted that precedent requires a prior art reference to disclose the invention without modification in order to anticipate. “[A] prior art reference that must …

Federal Circuit Affirms Patent Invalidity and District Court’s Denial of Post-Judgment Motions

The Federal Circuit heard the case on TVIIM, LLC v. McAfee, Inc. A unanimous panel of the Federal Circuit affirmed jury determinations of non-infringement and patent invalidity …

Federal Circuit Declines to Award Attorney Fees in Inventorship Dispute

The Federal Circuit heard the case on Univ. of Utah v. Max-Planck-Gesellschaft Zur Foerderung der Wissenschaften e.V. At issue is whether the district court abused its …

CAFC Affirms Attorney Fees Awarded Under ‘Holistic and Equitable’ Evaluation of Case

In conclusion, the Court held the district court did not abuse its discretion in determining that, under the totality of circumstances, this was an exceptional case, and …

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Anticipation Decision and Clarifies Kennameta

Anticipation can arise when the disclosure of a limited number of alternative combinations discloses the one that is claimed. However, a reference does not anticipate because an …

Mentor Graphics v. Synopsys: Affirmed-in-Part, Reversed-in-Part, Vacated-in-Part, and Remanded

Various Synopsys parties and EVE-USA, Inc. (collectively “Synopsys”) sued Mentor Graphics, seeking a declaration that Mentor’s ’376, ’531, and ’176 patents were invalid and not infringed. Mentor counterclaimed for …

Teaching Away Requires Discouragement or Implying the Combination Would Not Work

Michael Meiresonne (“Meiresonne”) appealed from the final inter partes review (“IPR”) decision of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”). The Board held that certain …

Sprint Still on the Hook to Comcast for $7.5 Million

The Federal Circuit affirmed a jury award of $7.5 million for Sprint’s infringement of three Comcast patents. The district court did not error in construing the challenged …