Posts Tagged: CAFC


Through the Looking Glass: Recent Federal Circuit Decisions Do Not Change the Need for Action on Alice

The few CAFC cases (since Alice) that have found inventions to be subject matter eligible is certainly a welcome development. These cases indicate that the CAFC does …
By Manny Schecter
6 months ago 5

I Dissent: The Federal Circuit’s ‘Great Dissenter,’ Her Influence on the Patent Dialogue, and Why It Matters

Today, Judge Newman is the Federal Circuit’s most prolific dissenter, and her dissents are important. Former Chief Judge Paul Michel noted that “Judge Newman may hold …
By Professor Daryl Lim
6 months ago 11

Federal Circuit: Adding one abstract idea to another abstract idea does not make the claim non-abstract

In RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision that RecogniCorp’s patent claims are directed to an abstract idea, and …

No evidence of lost sales or price erosion means no irreparable harm and no permanent injunction

Nichia Corporation (“Nichia”) sued Everlight Americas, Inc., Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd. and Zenaro Lighting (collectively, “Everlight”) for infringement of three of Nichia’s patents disclosing packaging designs …

Federal Circuit Clarifies On-Sale Bar Under America Invents Act

In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and held that Helsinn’s pre-AIA patent claims, “were subject …

Wi-Fi One vs. Broadcom May Reshape PTAB Trial Proceedings

The relationship between PTAB proceedings and parallel district court litigation may be altered significantly. The arguments in Wi-Fi One vs. Broadcom this week may change a lot …
By Amanda G. Ciccatelli
7 months ago 4

In precedential decision, Federal Circuit rules patent directed to encoding and decoding image data is not patent-eligible

The Federal Circuit held that the claim was directed to the abstract idea of encoding and decoding image data. According to the panel, the claim recited “a …
By John M. Rogitz
7 months ago 60

CAFC Interprets AIA On-Sale Bar: Invention details need not be public for sale to be invalidating

Earlier today the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a major decision interpreting provisions of the America Invents Act (AIA), specifically the AIA …
By Gene Quinn
7 months ago 6

Is ‘Plain and Ordinary Meaning’ a Viable Proposed Claim Construction After the Federal Circuit’s Decision in Eon?

In last year’s decision in Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Spring Network, Inc. 815 F.3d 1314, 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the Federal Circuit reversed the District Court’…
By Sarah Brooks
7 months ago 2

Recent court rumblings about a narrow scope of IPR estoppel

An Inter Partes Review (IPR) is an important tool for companies that face frequent patent infringement challenges. An IPR is essentially a mini-litigation focusing solely on patent …
By Mitchell Feller
7 months ago 2

Why the Unified Patents Model Would Not Work in China

Unified Patents is a relatively new form of patent troll that works as a “Troll of Trolls” or “ToT.” They file IPRs (inter-partes reexamination requests) to kill …
By Erick Robinson
7 months ago 18

Rule 36, Collateral Estoppel and Unequal Treatment at the Federal Circuit

IntegraSpec was denied the opportunity to make its case here because of collateral estoppel based on the reasoning that they already had a full and fair opportunity …
By Gene Quinn & Peter Harter
7 months ago 7

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 …