The differences between the Federal Circuit’s most-reversed and least-reversed district courts run far deeper than their success rates on appeal — a metric that can vary widely throughout the judiciary, according to Law360’s look at three years of Federal Circuit cases.
Biotech company Codexis Inc. bashed rival EnzymeWorks Inc. and its founder Junhua Tao on Tuesday for allegedly violating a deal to end a lawsuit, which accused Tao in California federal court of ripping off its trade secrets and patents, when EnzymeWorks issued a press release about that very settlement.
The Federal Circuit on Tuesday upheld U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap’s decision to invalidate claims in four Integrated Technological Systems Inc. patents tied to money transfers in the newest of several high-profile decisions over how to interpret the U.S. Supreme Court’s Alice test.
Comcast Inc. has asked the Federal Circuit to follow an expedited schedule in its review of an International Trade Commission decision prohibiting the cable and broadband company from importing set-top cable boxes found to infringe a patent held by TiVo Corp.
Amgen Inc. on Monday asked a D.C. federal judge to order the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to temporarily refrain from approving any generic versions of its blockbuster drug Sensipar while it appeals a recent order that found the agency properly denied pediatric exclusivity for the calcium-control drug.
Singer-songwriter Frank Ocean is accusing a music producer of falsely attempting to claim authorship of songs on his 2016 hit album “Blonde,” alleging “a serious and substantial violation” of his rights under the Copyright Act in a complaint filed in California federal court Tuesday.
DeLorean Motor Co., set to relaunch the iconic 1980s sports car made famous in “Back to the Future,” is suing a cosmetics company for trademark infringement for using the DeLorean name on an “age-suspending” lotion.
The Federal Circuit on Tuesday upheld a Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision that a word-recognition patent challenged by Google is invalid as obvious, ruling that while one of the board’s two rulings on the patent was wrong, the other was correct.
The number of patent cases the Federal Circuit ruled on without writing an opinion is in decline for the first time in recent years, amid criticism over the court’s use of these “silent decisions” and a plateau in its patent workload.
The Federal Circuit was in a mostly agreeable mood last year, with only 7 percent of decisions including a dissent or concurrence compared with 10 percent in 2016, but the judges still found plenty of ways to criticize their colleagues’ reasoning. Here are some of 2017’s most biting and noteworthy dissents.
What Judge Barry Ostrager had hoped would be a quick dispute over whether to disqualify King & Spalding LLP from representing an animal health company in international arbitration stretched for two hours on Tuesday, with three more witnesses set to take the stand on Wednesday.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Tuesday denied a petition from FedEx seeking review of a shipping and transit patent owned by Intellectual Ventures, saying that the package delivery giant’s arguments to institute a review on the patent, which it had challenged once before, were “unpersuasive.”
A federal judge in Massachusetts on Tuesday kept alive, but transferred to Texas, a small storage facility’s claim that misleading website URLs undercut state and federal antitrust and trademark laws for an edge in Google search results.
Electronic medical records company ZenCharts LLC responded Friday to a $30 million suit by rival Kipu Systems, denying claims it ripped off Kipu's cloud-based records system and adding its own counterclaims that Kipu has interfered with its legitimate efforts to build a superior system.
The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to hear appeals from Pfizer Inc. and Teva Pharmaceuticals in their bids to duck claims they participated in schemes to delay generic forms of cholesterol drug Lipitor and antidepressant medication Effexor XR, respectively.
GoPro Inc. asked a California federal judge overseeing its trademark and copyright infringement suit against 360Heros Inc. to sanction the rival company, claiming it produced falsified documentation for remarks that didn't happen during a Skype discussion and then committed perjury about the forged evidence.
Latham & Watkins won nearly $1.7 million in attorneys' fees, costs and interest after being represented by McKool Smith Hennigan PC in a long-running malicious prosecution action that went all the way to the California Supreme Court, with the judge finding the fees reasonable and the five-year appellate process "highly unusual."
Electronic Arts Inc. has urged a California federal judge to grant it a win in a putative class action brought by retired NFL players who claim EA improperly used their likenesses to make Madden video games, arguing that the athletes can’t prove they’re readily identifiable in the games.
These law firms handled some of the hottest issues in intellectual property last year, racking up wins and setting precedent in all corners of patent law.
A hefty patent caseload has been the new normal for the Federal Circuit since America Invents Act proceedings first hit the court three years ago, but 2017 still saw some subtle changes. Here, Law360 looks at the latest trends in patent appeals.
A California federal judge on Thursday denied Boston Scientific Corp.’s bid to seal documents related to Nevro Corp.’s suit claiming infringement of its spinal cord pain treatment patents, saying Boston’s attorneys must file explanations why they shouldn’t be sanctioned for “frivolous and vexatious conduct.”
A Supreme Court ruling redrew the patent litigation map. The International Trade Commission became an ever more popular patent venue. District courts saw fewer cases. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board isn’t what it used to be. 2017 was a challenging year for patent attorneys.
For many small entities, startup companies and universities, patent litigation is simply too expensive to pursue. Contingency fee patent litigation eliminates these concerns for certain cases, says Eric Evain, leader of Grant & Eisenhofer PA's intellectual property litigation group.
A Virginia federal court's recent decision in Limelight v. XO confirmed an apparent trend in courts’ acceptance of bargaining theory, based either on Rubinstein or Nash, to model hypothetical negotiations in intellectual property disputes, says Jeffrey Klenk of Berkeley Research Group LLC.
Foreign-language trademarks can be creative, appealing and exotic, but the doctrine of foreign equivalents presents a risk. It appears that the main criterion used by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board is still the number of speakers of a given language in the prospective marketplace where the marks will be utilized, says Davide Schiavetti of Rothwell Figg Ernst & Manbeck PC.
Multidistrict litigation is an ever-expanding driver of product liability litigation, but when the MDL process runs its course there is often still a trial to be had, and there are strategic and practical decisions to consider once a case has been remanded. Brandon Cox and Charissa Walker of Tucker Ellis LLP offer tips on how to navigate the remand process.
As litigation funding becomes more widespread, greater complexity and variability in funding deals are to be expected. All claimants should consider certain key questions on the economics of single-case funding when considering or comparing funding terms, says Julia Gewolb of Bentham IMF.
Artificial intelligence technology can rapidly change, but a company’s intellectual property strategy should move with it to capture the growth or business goals at each iteration. Otherwise, an outsider could question the true value of the AI technology or a competitor could develop similar technology with accompanying IP, says Andrew MacArthur of Venable LLP.
Given the operational and security risks involved, and the substantial digital asset values transacted, the rise of distributed ledger technology and smart contracts will create new opportunities and responsibilities for transactional lawyers, say attorneys with Potter Anderson Corroon LLP.
The Federal Circuit recently ruled that the patent in Exmark v. Briggs & Stratton provided reasonable certainty on how to determine whether a lawn mower baffle portion was long enough and straight enough to be considered “elongated and substantially straight” for the purposes of determining infringement. The analysis may diminish the confidence of parties to design around patent claims, says Harold Borland of Haynes and Boone LLP.
Two hot topics in intellectual property law — the pending Oil States case, and the applicability of sovereign immunity before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board — have possible implications for patent litigation in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, say Matthew Rizzolo and Ryan Brunner of Ropes & Gray LLP.
A witness who has been told what to do and what not to do will be ineffective at best. Instead, witnesses must be taught how to handle the process, and how to approach the answer to every question that they encounter. These are new skills, and they must be practiced in order to be learned, says Ric Dexter, an independent litigation consultant.