Posts Tagged: Judge WIlliam Bryson


Implied Waiver May Result from Failure to Disclose Pending Application to Standard Setting Organization

The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued a ruling on discussing the equitable doctrine of implied waiver; a decision that will be …

Rejection of proposal did not obviate requirement to disclose inventions to standard setting body

The Federal Circuit, however, found the district court’s enforceability finding to be unsupported by evidence. The rejection of Nokia’s proposal did not obviate Nokia’s …
By Steve Brachmann & Gene Quinn
1 month ago 1

Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB’s Determination of CBM Patent After Appeal by Apple and Google

On Wednesday, July 11th, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Apple v. ContentGuard Holdings vacating a decision by the Patent Trial …
By Steve Brachmann
2 months ago 2

No blanket prohibition against the introduction of new evidence during an inter partes review

There is no blanket prohibition against the introduction of new evidence during an inter partes review proceeding, indeed new evidence should be expected. A petitioner can introduce …

Jury Cannot Award Disgorgement of Profits in Trade Secret Misappropriation Cases

In Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions v. Renesas Electrics, a jury found Renesas liable for both patent infringement and trade secret misappropriation. The jury awarded a reasonable royalty …

Control Over District Court Litigation is Required for Time Bar Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)

An IPR petition is not time-barred for reasons of privity with a district court defendant in a prior litigation when no evidence shows that the petitioner controlled …

Prosecution Disclaimer 101: Argument relied upon by examiner results in prosecution disclaimer

The PTAB found the claims in question obvious for two reasons. First, in its primary ruling the PTAB held that there was no prosecution disclaimer, finding the "…
By Gene Quinn
7 months ago 2

CAFC denies Amgen discovery in biosimilar patent dispute

In a patent infringement case governed by the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), the Federal Circuit found that it lacked jurisdiction to compel discovery …

Further Study Does Not Undermine Reasonable Expectation of Success; ‘Absolute Predictability’ is Not Required

A reasonable expectation of success in combining references to obtain the claimed invention does not require absolute certainty or predictability. As a result, an invention is not …

CAFC: Exclusive license must include provisions establishing minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction

In New World International v. Ford Global Techs, FGTL sued New World for patent infringement in Michigan. New World countersued in Texas, seeking a declaratory judgment that …

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 …

CAFC sides with L.A. Biomedical Research over Eli Lilly in two IPRs challenging penile fibrosis patent

LAB sued Eli Lilly & Company, alleging marketing of the drug Cialis induced infringement of LAB’s patent. Eli Lilly subsequently requested that the Board conduct inter partes …

In non-precedential decision, CAFC vacates district court grant of summary judgment

In vacating the district court’s summary judgment order, the Federal Circuit noted first that statements made by Micron’s expert regarding what the anticipatory reference disclosed …
By John M. Rogitz
2 years ago 1

Proper §112 Indefiniteness Analysis is Directed to the Claims Themselves, Not the Terms

The Federal Circuit Court found that the source of the purported indefiniteness (“processing system”) played no role in defining the claims. Since the asserted claims are method …

Our website uses cookies to provide you with a better experience. Read our privacy policy for more information.Accept and Close