Posts Tagged: Judge Jimmie Reyna


Personal Jurisdiction is Not Established by Prior Lawsuit or Sending Infringement Notice Letters

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed the District Court for the Eastern District of Tennessee’s dismissal of a declaratory judgment action based on a finding of lack …

Supremes Deny 101 Appeal Dealing with Electronic Data and Electromagnetic Signals

On Monday, December 3rd, the U.S. Supreme Court denied a petition for writ of certiorari in Carl M. Burnett v. Panasonic Corporation, declining to take up …
By Steve Brachmann
2 months ago 14

Defensive Collateral Estoppel Applies Only if Essentially Identical Accused Product Found Non-infringing

In its opinion, the Federal Circuit explained that defensive collateral estoppel of non-infringement applies in very limited circumstances where “a close identity exists between the relevant features …

Federal Circuit Holds a ‘Similar Enough’ Claim Construction Doesn’t Violate the APA

In Hamilton Beach Brands v. F’Real Foods, the Federal Circuit found that under the Administrative Procedure Act, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s adopted claim …

Federal Circuit affirms PTAB Mixed Decision in Acceleration Bay v. Activision Blizzard

Acceleration Bay appealed the final written decisions of the Board holding claims 1-9 of U.S. Patent No. 6,829,634, claims 1-11 and 16-19 of U.S. Patent No. 6,701,344, …

Blockbuster Restasis Patent Goes Down at Federal Circuit a Victim of Rule 36

Without any explanation, analysis or justification, Chief Judge Prost, and Judges Reyna and Hughes affirmed the decision of colleague Judge Bryson. A patent to a blockbuster drug …
By Gene Quinn & Steve Brachmann
2 months ago 23

Rule 36 Affirmances at the Federal Circuit – Week of October 8, 2018

During the week of October 8, 2018,  there were five cases involving patents that were decided without an opinion as a result of Rule 36 affirmances at the United States …
By Steve Brachmann & Gene Quinn
3 months ago 11

CAFC: Hyatt APA Challenges Time-Barred and Based on Incorrect Statutory Interpretation

The Federal Circuit recently issued an opinion in a decades-longbattle over the microcomputer patent applications of Mr. Hyatt, the named inventor on more than 70 issued patents and …

To invalidate method claims a challenger must show more than the prior art is ‘capable of’ performing the claimed limitations

To invalidate method claims, a challenger must show more than that the prior art is “capable of” performing the claimed limitations—the challenger should also show that “…

Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Finding of Implicit Disclosure

The Federal Circuit recently issued an opinion affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“PTAB”) finding of obviousness of a hot-spot technology patent based on implicit …

Intellectual Ventures v. T-Mobile: Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement Vacated Due to Incorrect Claim Construction

In claim construction analyses, the plain and ordinary meaning of a claim term will not be narrowed by statements in the prosecution history, unless those statements clearly …

CAFC vacates Summary Judgment entered against Intellectual Ventures

On Tuesday, September 4th, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc., et. al., …
By Steve Brachmann & Gene Quinn
4 months ago 0

Federal Circuit Vacates PTAB Decision for Failure to Consider Ericsson Reply Brief

In its decision, the Federal Circuit noted that the PTAB is entitled to strike arguments improperly raised in a reply brief under 37 CFR § 42.23(b). However, the appellate …
By Steve Brachmann
5 months ago 0

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 …

CAFC vacates $51 million fee award, exceptional case requires ‘causal connection’ to award fees

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s “exceptional” case finding under 35 U.S.C. § 285, which resulted in Appellant Rembrandt Technologies paying attorney’s fees to …