Posts Tagged: CAFC


Federal Circuit says PTAB decision on redundancy of asserted IPR grounds not appealable

The Federal Circuit held, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 314(d), that it does not have jurisdiction to review an institution decision, because a “determination by the Director …

CAFC overturns $18 million verdict because jury improperly left to determine claim scope

Following a five-day trial, the jury found the asserted claims valid and infringed, and awarded Eon $18,800,000. In determining only that the terms should be given their plain …

Federal Circuit: Disparagement of Prior Art in the Specification Can Limit Claim Language

UltimatePointer argued that the district court improperly construed “handheld device” to require direct pointing, because there was no disavowal or lexicography in the specification to exclude indirect …

Federal Circuit: Exclusive licensee with all substantial rights can sue without patent owner

Over the course of several amendments, Disney granted increasing rights to Candella, by which Disney specifically intended to give Candella standing to sue for patent infringement. The …

Will the Supreme Court consider a CAFC penchant for setting aside patent jury verdicts?

We along with several other attorneys represent ParkerVision, the plaintiff, which secured a $173 million infringement verdict that the courts subsequently threw out based on their own assessment …

CAFC find Inequitable Conduct on argument plus withholding contradictory evidence

In the second reexamination, OWW’s representations about a lack of corroborating evidence constituted inequitable conduct, because OWW was aware that such corroborating evidence existed. Specifically, James …

BRI in IPR may be narrower than broadest ordinary meaning, broader than Phillips standard

The Court noted that the Board failed to account for how the claims and specification inform the ordinary skilled artisan as to what ordinary definition the patentee …

CAFC reaffirms PTAB discretion not to address all claims in IPR final written decision

On February 10, 2016, a divided Federal Circuit panel reaffirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) authority to institute trial and provide a final written decision on …

Voluntary Narrowing of Patents Claims Waives Right to Later Jury Trial on Untried Claims

Nuance originally asserted over 140 claims from eight different patents against defendant ABBYY. The case was quickly referred to a special master for scheduling following Markman. The master …

Restricted Sales Do Not Exhaust Patent Rights Under Supreme Court Rulings

The Federal Circuit took the case en banc to review the applicability of the patent exhaustion doctrine under Mallinckrodt and Jazz Photo, in view of the Supreme …

CAFC: Defendant had no notice of intent to pursue patent rights in US after foreign proceedings

Each week, we succinctly summarize the preceding week of Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions. We provide the pertinent facts, issues, and holdings. Our Review allows you to …

CAFC reaffirms patent exhaustion doctrine cases en banc in Lexmark Int’l v. Impression Products

In a painfully long decision that at one point analyzed a 1628 statement of Lord Coke as relating to British common-law principles and what light that might shed …
By Gene Quinn
11 months ago 36

Nike v. Adidas: Federal Circuit refines PTAB motion to amend practice in inter partes review

The USPTO argued that at the heart of the requirement that substitute claims be patentable over prior art not of record but known to the patentee is …
By Gene Quinn
11 months ago 2

Federal Circuit Reiterates High Standard for Prosecution History Disclaimer

In a January 29, 2016 decision, the Federal Circuit vacated a jury judgment of non-infringement and ordered the District of Delaware to conduct a new trial where construction of …

CAFC Dismisses Inter Partes Reexamination Appeal By a Party Who was Not Initial Requester

Waters argued that Agilent could not appeal, because Aurora was the third-party requester of the reexamination, not Agilent. The Court held that the relevant question was whether …