In In re: Google Technology Holdings LLC, the Federal Circuit held that Google forfeited its claim construction arguments made on appeal to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (Patent Office) designated new Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) precedents protecting patent owners from multiple inter partes review (IPR) challenges.
In Centripetal Networks, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.,1 the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia directed Cisco Systems to pay $1.9 billion after the company lost a patent suit brought by Centripetal Networks for infringing its patented cybersecurity features and preventing ...
In Western Plastics, Inc. v. DuBose Strapping, Inc., the district court granted Western Plastic’s motion for treble damages because defendant DuBose Strapping did not reasonably rely on the advice of its counsel.
On August 28, the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Egenera, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., offering a timely reminder of the importance of carefully drafting claim language as well as the technical specification that is used to interpret that claim language.
In Craft Smith, LLC v. EC Design, LLC, the U.S. Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit, ruled that a knockoff version of a personal organizer did not infringe the original organizer’s overall design.
In Dana-Farber Cancer Institute v. Ono Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., the Federal Circuit held that publication of a part of a complicated invention did not automatically preclude joint inventorship of that invention.
In U.S. Patent & Trademark Office v. Booking.com B.V., the Supreme Court held, in an 8-1 decision, that a generic word combined with the top-level domain “.com” can be a federally protectable trademark if it has secondary meaning to consumers.
In Akeva L.L.C., v. Nike, Inc., the Federal Circuit held that a disclaimer in a specification that excluded a particular embodiment prevented later claims in the continuation patents from claiming the excluded embodiment, thereby breaking the priority chain.
G&M Realty (G&M), the owner of the famous New York City graffiti space known as 5Pointz, asked the Supreme Court to strike down as unconstitutional the Visual Artists Rights Act (VARA), a federal copyright law that provides limited protection for artists against destruction or mutilation of ...