Filewrapper

“Comprised of” means the same as “comprising,” judgment of noninfringement affirmed

Today, the Federal Circuit addressed how to interpret the phrase "comprised of" in a patent claim. In holding that the phrase should be construed in the same open-ended way the term "comprising" is traditionally construed, the court disagreed with the district court's finding that the phrase was closed-ended and excluded the presence of all elements […]

Continue Reading →

Finding of infringement of two patents affirmed, one reversed, damages award vacated

In a highly anticipated recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the judgment of infringement against Vonage with respect to two Verizon patents, holding that the district court did not err in its construction of the disputed claim terms and that the claims were not obvious. With respect to a third patent, the Federal Circuit held […]

Continue Reading →

USPTO’s claim construction not reasonable, anticipation rejection reversed

In a decision today, the Federal Circuit reversed the rejection of claims in a pending application as anticipated. The relevant limitation was "flexible polyurethane foam reaction mixture." The examiner and BPAI interpreted this to encompass any mixture that ultimately produces a flexible polyurethane foam. The alleged anticipatory reference initial produced a rigid foam, but then […]

Continue Reading →

Injunction against trademark “disparagement” reversed; no such claim under the Lanham Act

In a decision yesterday, the Ninth Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction preventing an individual from "making any comments that could be construed as to disparage" a possible trademark and logo. The court concluded that the injunction was improperly granted since the plaintiff failed to present a likelihood of success on the merits by failing to […]

Continue Reading →

Sixth Circuit: No likelihood of confusion between competing wines using same geographic term

In a decision last week, the Sixth Circuit affirmed a district court ruling that use of the mark "Chateau de Leelanau Vineyard and Winery" did not create a likelihood of confusion among consumers with the plaintiff's "Leelanau Cellars" federally-registered mark. "Leelanau" in both marks is a reference to a peninsula in Michigan where the wine […]

Continue Reading →

Supreme Court to hear patent exhaustion case

In its first conference of this Term, the Supreme Court today granted certiorari in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (No. 06-937). Our previous coverage of the case can be found in these two posts. The question presented is: Whether the Federal Circuit erred by holding, in conflict with decisions of this Court and […]

Continue Reading →

Summary judgment of noninfringement reversed: challenge to reliability of expert testimony waived

In a decision Friday, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's grant of summary judgment of noninfringement. The court held the district court improperly made a factual determination regarding the reliability of an expert's test used to establish infringement. Based on statements made during summary judgment briefing and argument, the defendants could not argue the […]

Continue Reading →

Injunction against patentee’s assertions of infringement reversed, bad faith standard not met

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit vacated a preliminary injunction after finding that the district court abused its discretion. The district court enjoined a patent owner from any future correspondence with any existing or potential customers of an alleged infringer (started by former employees of the patent owner), essentially stopping the patentee from […]

Continue Reading →

Claims to a “method for mandatory arbitration resolution” not drawn to statutory subject matter

In the second of two decisions regarding the scope of patentable subject matter on Thursday, the Federal Circuit found claims in a patent application directed toward a "method for mandatory arbitration resolution" as not directed toward statutory subject matter under § 101. The USPTO had not addressed the statutory subject matter issue, rather the Federal […]

Continue Reading →

Declaratory judgment jurisdiction exists, sufficient corroboration of prior public use to invalidate

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit upheld a district court's decision that a case or controversy existed providing subject matter jurisdiction and that the patent was invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) based on a public use more than a year before the patent's priority date. A licensee's decision to stop royalty payments […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

Receive the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Sign Up