Filewrapper®

Category: Supreme Court


Resolving Circuit Splits: Supreme Court Addresses Issues Regarding Legal Fees
March 07, 2019
Post by Tina G. Yin Sowatzke, Pharm.D.
Tina G Yin-Sowatzke On March 4, 2019, the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Iancu v. NantKwest, Inc. to settle the debate over what “all the expenses” means under the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) win-or-lose attorney fee policy. This controversial policy involves seeking attorneys’ fees from applicants, regardless of the outcome of a case. During patent prosecution, if met wi.......
Read More


Inter Partes Review Proceedings (IPRs) Do Not Violate Article III of the Constitution per U.S. Supreme Court
April 24, 2018
Post by Jonathan L. Kennedy
The U.S. Supreme held in a 7-2 decision (Justice Gorsuch and Chief Justice Roberts dissenting), Oil States Energy Servs. V. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, that the Inter Partes Review proceedings, commonly referred to as IPRs, do not violate Article III or the Seventh Amendment. The Court was deciding two primary constitutional challenges: (1) whether IPRs violate Article III of the constitution by assigni.......
Read More


Constitutionality of Inter Partes Reviews: A Look at Supreme Court Oral Arguments in Oil States
December 06, 2017
Post by Blog Staff
The enactment of the AIA in 2011, inter partes review (IPR), has been available as a method to challenge the validity of a patent in the US Patent and Trademark Office. A total of 6139 IPR petitions (92% of all petitions) have been filed with the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) since that time. One of those challenges occurred when Green’s Energy Group, in response to litigation, went to the PTAB t.......
Read More


Say What You Will About Trademarks
June 19, 2017
Post by Blog Staff
Simon Tam chose to name his band “The Slants” with the intent to reclaim the term and erase the denigrating connotations associated with it. However, he was confronted with the denial of his trademark application based on the disparagement clause of the Lanham Act. This raised an interesting issue of whether the disparagement clause violates the First Amendment. The Lanham Act allows trademarks to be fed.......
Read More


U.S. Supreme Court Limits Where Patent Infringement Defendants Can be Sued
May 22, 2017
Post by Jonathan L. Kennedy
In TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court limited the locations that patent infringement suits can be brought against a defendant, i.e., venue for the lawsuit.  Proper venue is established by 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) as the place where (1) the defendant resides or (2) where the defendant has committed the acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of.......
Read More


Supreme Court Upholds Broadest Reasonable Interpretation and No Review for Institution in PTAB Proceedings
June 20, 2016
Post by Blog Staff
. The Supreme Court has issued its opinion in the case of In re Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC. In re Cuozzo initially began as an inter partes review (IPR) with the Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) where Garmin challenged the validity of Cuozzo's patent relating to an interface that uses GPS technology to display a vehicle's speed as well as the speed limit on the basis that Cuozzo's patent was.......
Read More


Supreme Court Issues Decision on Treble Damages
June 13, 2016
Post by Blog Staff
On the subject of willful infringement, 35 U.S.C. § 284 provides that, "[T]he court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.‚¬ On its face, the statute allows for broad discretion by the district courts, but the Federal Circuit set out a stricter standard for awarding of enhanced damages, as In re Seagate Technology LLC. This test required clear and c.......
Read More


Supreme Court Revisits Standard for Awarding Attorneys' Fees in Copyright Cases
April 28, 2016
Post by Brandon W. Clark
Brandon W. Clark Earlier this week the Supreme Court heard oral arguments addressing the relevant standard for awarding attorneys' fees in cases involving copyright law. The Court's ruling, expected later this spring, will likely have a significant impact on copyright litigation cases. Section 505 of the Copyright Act provides that a district court "may"award a reasonable attorney's fee to a "prevai.......
Read More


Supreme Court to Review Willful Infringement Standard in Light of Octane Fitness
October 21, 2015
Post by Blog Staff
Paul S. Mazzola In the 2014 case of Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness, the Supreme Court overruled Federal Circuit jurisprudence and provided a flexible framework for district courts to grant attorney's fees in "exceptional cases"under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The Court reasoned that requiring a prevailing party to show "material inappropriate conduct"or that a case was both "object.......
Read More


Supreme Court Weighs in on Belief of Patent Invalidity and Induced Infringement
June 24, 2015
Post by Blog Staff
Under 35 U.S.C. § 271, a party can be held liable for infringement of a patent under in a number of different ways. The most common liability is for direct, literal infringement of the patent, meaning that accused party actually practices every element of the asserted patent claim(s). The statute also includes provisions for liability based on importation products (§ 271(g)); contributory.......
Read More


Shifting Pre-Trial Strategy in the Wake of Alice and Ultramercial
December 04, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
Four recent Supreme Court cases involving patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., Ass'n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., and Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International ) have had the practical effect of heightening the standard for patentability. However, these cases may also be altering the way patent c.......
Read More


Is the Supreme Court Re-Aiming Markman?
October 17, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
The 1996 United States Supreme Court decision in Markman v. Westview Instruments established a landmark change for claim construction in patent infringement cases. That case established that the meaning of the claim language of a patent is a matter of law for a judge to decide, and not a matter of fact that should be determined by the jury. Since the decision, what is now known as a "Claim Construction Heari.......
Read More


Supreme Court Determines Internet Service Violates Copyrights
June 26, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court has issued its much anticipateddecision in American Broadcasting Co., Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. The Court held that an internet service provided by Aereo—which allows subscribes to watch television programs over the internet contemporaneous with the programs as they are broadcasted over the air—violates of a copyright owner's exclusive right to perform a work publicly under the 1976 Co.......
Read More


Generic Computer Implementation Cannot Save Patent-Ineligible Abstract Idea
June 23, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
On June 19, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated opinion inAlice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l. The Petitioner, Alice Corporation ("Alice Corp.") is the assignee of the four patents at issue which disclose method, system, and media claims related to a computerized scheme for mitigating "settlement risk." Respondents CLS Bank International and CLS Services Ltd. ("CLS") o.......
Read More


Supreme Court Holds Induced Infringement Requires Direct Infringement
June 03, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
This week the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, concluding that an act of direct patent infringement must be present for a claim of inducement of infringement. The decision unanimously held that a defendant may not be liable for inducing infringement of a patent under 35 U.S.C. Section 27(b) when no one has directly infringed the patent under Section 271(a) .......
Read More


Supreme Court Defines Scope of Definiteness Required in Patent Claims
June 02, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. defining the standard for definiteness necessary to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. Section 112, second paragraph. The decision unanimously rejected the "insolubly ambiguous" standard previously employed by the Federal Circuit to determine whether patent claims meet the statutory requirement to "partic.......
Read More


Supreme Court Issues Indefiniteness and Inducement Decisions
June 02, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court this week issued its decisions in two much anticipated IP cases. The Court's decision in Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tech. concludes that at least one underlying act of direct patent infringement must be present for a claim of inducement of infringement. In Nautilus v. BioSig the Court instituted a new standard for indefiniteness, supplanting the existing "insolubly ambiguous" st.......
Read More


Copyright 3-year Statute of Limitations Trumps Laches Defense
May 20, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
PETRELLA v. METRO-GOLDWYN-MAYER, INC. Frank Petrella wrote two screenplays and one book based on the life of boxing champion Jake LaMotta. One of the screenplays, registered in 1963, identifies Patrella as the sole author, written in collaboration with LaMotta. LaMotta and Patrella assigned their rights in the screenplay, including renewal rights, to Chartoff-Winkler Productions, Inc. in 1976, who in turn sold.......
Read More


MVS Filewrapper - Blog:Supreme Court Revises Standards for Sanctions in Exceptional Patent Cases
April 29, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
Two U.S. Supreme Court opinions issued today—Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. and Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management System, Inc.—have changed the framework for which exceptional cases are analyzed under § 285 of the Patent Act. For years, the controlling case with regard to § 285 of the Patent Act was Brooks Furniture Mfg., Inc. v. Dutailier Int'l, Inc. In.......
Read More


Who May Bring a Federal False Advertising Suit?
April 02, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court's recent decision in Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. prescribed the appropriate framework for determining whether a plaintiff has standing in a false advertising action under the 15 U.S.C. 1125(a). Prior to this decision, there were three competing approaches to determining whether a plaintiff has standing to bring suit under the Lanham Act: · .......
Read More


2014 Supreme Court Cases Relating to Intellectual Property
January 16, 2014
Post by Blog Staff
On January 10, 2014 the Supreme Court agreed to review a variety of intellectual property cases in the upcoming session, including two patent cases, a copyright case, and a trademark case (including Lanham Act claim). A brief overview of these cases is provided and more detail will be available once decisions are entered by the Court. Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. (U.S., No. 12-786.) Ques.......
Read More


Bring on the New Year - What is in Store for IP in 2014?
December 31, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
Happy New Year to all of our FilewrapperÒ followers! We hope 2013 was a productive year and wish you the best in 2014. As the New Year quickly approaches we would like to share with you a few predictions for 2014 for you to look forward to and for which to prepare! · Increased opportunities for quasi-litigation under AIA. Various new mechanisms are available to challenge patents under the Am.......
Read More


Federal Judicial Center - Hot Topics in Patent Litigation
December 12, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
The Federal Judicial Center recently released a Webinar entitled “Hot Topics in Patent Litigation: Actavis, Hatch-Waxman and the Biosimilars Act.” The Webinar focused on recent developments in areas regarding enforcement of patents in the life science area, generic drugs, and generic biologics. The entire webinar is available here; the following are brief highlights: Hatch-Waxman Patent Settlements: .......
Read More


Supreme Court Addresses Product of Nature Doctrine Relating to Gene Patents
June 13, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court today handed down its decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. The Court held that isolated DNA is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated, but that complementary DNA (cDNA) is patent eligible because it is not naturally occurring. The Court limited its holding to the patentability of isolated genes and cDNA, concluding t.......
Read More


Supreme Court Rejects Patent Exhaustion Defense for Patented Bean Replanting
May 13, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court has handed down its much anticipated decision in Bowman v. Monsanto Co., holding that the defense of patent exhaustion does not apply to the practice of planting and harvesting patented seeds through planting and harvesting without the patent holder's permission. The case centers on the Roundup Ready gene, which confers resistance to glyphosate herbicides such as Roundup. Monsanto owns U.S. .......
Read More


Supreme Court Decides Foreign First Sale Doctrine
March 28, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court recentlydecided a much anticipated case, finally answering a long awaited question: Does the first sale doctrine apply to copyrighted works manufactured in other countries? According to the Supreme Court in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., the answer to this question is yes. John Wiley & Sons sued Supap Kirtsaeng for selling textbooks on eBay that he import.......
Read More


U.S. Supreme Court Addresses Jurisdiction In Patent Related Case
February 21, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
Normal 0 false false false EN-US X-NONE X-NONE Read More


New and Useful - Janurary 14, 2013
January 14, 2013
Post by Blog Staff
· The Supreme Court handed down its decision in Already, LLC v. Nike, Inc. The Court held that Nike’s covenant not to sue Alreadyfor alleged infringement of Nike’s AIR FORCE 1 trademark—entered into after Nike had filed suit and Already had filed a counterclaim challenging the mark’s validity—rendered both Nike’s claims and Already’s counterclaims moot. Th.......
Read More


Supreme Court Orders Federal Circuit to Reconsider Patent-Eligibility of Genes
March 30, 2012
Post by Blog Staff
Just six days after it handed down its decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., the Supreme Court vacated the Federal Circuit’s decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. United States Patent and Trademark Office, ordering the appellate court to reconsider the case in light of the Prometheus decision. Order granting cert., vacating judgment, and remanding for further.......
Read More


Supreme Court Clarifies Patentability of Medical Treatments
March 21, 2012
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court recently handed down its unanimous decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., No. 10-1150, slip op. (March 20, 2012). The Court specifically considered the patentability of a method for determining the effective levels of a drug to be administered to a patient, and found the claims in question to be unpatentable as “laws of nature.” Although some may .......
Read More


Court Redefines Knowledge Requirement for Induced Infringement
June 15, 2011
Post by Blog Staff
In a recent decision, authored by Justice Alito and joined by all the other Justices but Justice Kennedy, the Supreme Court redefined the knowledge requirement for finding induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The case—which centered on a patent for an innovative fryer—provided an opportunity for the Court to elucidate what is required for active inducement of infringement: that the par.......
Read More


Supreme Court Clarifies Ownership Rights in Federally Funded Inventions Under the Bayh-Dole Act
June 08, 2011
Post by Blog Staff
In a 7-2 decision released yesterday, the Supreme Court ruled the University and Small Business Patent Procedures Act of 1980 (“the Bayh-Dole Act”) does not displace the general rule that rights in an invention belong to the inventor, and does not automatically vest title to federally funded inventions in the contractors receiving the federal funds. Chief Justice Roberts, writing for the majority, wro.......
Read More


Bayh-Dole Patent Ownership Dispute to be heard by Supreme Court
November 08, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
Last week, the Supreme Court announced it will review the Federal Circuit decision in Stanford v. Roche, addressing patent ownership under the Bayh-Dole Act, after granting Stanford's petition for a writ of certiorari. The Court will decide an interesting patent ownership dispute involving the contractual obligation of a University inventor to assign rights to the University and the same inventor's prior a.......
Read More


Supreme Court hears arguments today regarding first sale doctrine and international purchases
November 08, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
This morning the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Costco Wholesale Corp. v. Omega S.A., a case regarding the potential international scope of the first sale doctrine. Costco lawfully purchased authentic Omega watches abroad and imported them to the United States for sale in its stores. Omega sued for copyright infringement, arguing the watches bore a copyrighted design and the purchase abroad did not exh.......
Read More


Supreme Court to hear case regarding proper standard for proving inducing infringement under 271(b)
October 12, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
In an order today, the Supreme Court agreed to hear a case regarding the necessary intent for inducing infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The case is Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., docket number 10-6. The specific question presented is:Whether the legal standard for the state of mind element of a claim for actively inducing infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b) is "deliberate indiff.......
Read More


Supreme Court: Business method patents survive, but barely; Bilski's claims unpatentable
June 29, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
Yesterday, the Supreme Court decided Bilski v. Kappos, the most recent case at the Court probing the boundaries of patentable subject matter under § 101. Details of the underlying facts of the Bilski case may be found in our post on the Federal Circuit's en banc decision here. All nine Justices agreed that Bilski's method claims were not patentable. All nine Justices also agreed the "machine-.......
Read More


Bilski decided
June 28, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
This morning, the Supreme Court handed down its opinion in Bilski v. Kappos. The court affirmed the Federal Circuit's decision. We'll have more detailed analysis soon. To read the opinion, click here. ....
Read More


Supreme Court: NFL collective licensing of trademarks not immune from Section 1 antitrust scrutiny
May 26, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
Monday the Supreme Court unanimously held the NFL's practice of collectively licensing the trademarks of all 32 individual teams is not immune from antitrust scrutiny under Section 1 of the Sherman Act. The NFL argued that because the marks are all licensed through a single entity, NFL Properties, there was no "contract, combination, . . . or conspiracy" under § 1, and therefore there could .......
Read More


Supreme Court: Registration requirement of 411(a) not jurisdictional for copyright claims
March 02, 2010
Post by Blog Staff
Today the Supreme Court decided Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, a case regarding whether the registration requirement of 17 U.S.C. § 411(a) is jurisdictional or a claim processing rule. The Court held the requirement to be nonjurisdictional. The case involves a class action for copyright infringement by freelance journalists based on republication of works in electronic databases that originally appeared .......
Read More


Highlights from oral arguments in Bilski v. Kappos
November 11, 2009
Post by Blog Staff
On Monday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Bilski v. Kappos in an effort to determine the proper test to be applied to determine whether a claim is patentable subject matter under § 101. The oral argument transcript is available from the Court's website here. Click below for our thoughts on the arguments and some of the more interesting quotes from the Justices' questioning. From the outse.......
Read More


Supreme Court grants certiorari in Bilski
June 01, 2009
Post by Blog Staff
In an order today, the Supreme Court agreed to hear an appeal in Bilski v. Doll regarding the patentability of method claims. Back in October, the Federal Circuit decided In re Bilski, adopting the "machine-or-transformation" test as the exclusive test to determine whether a method is drawn to patentable subject matter. Bilski filed a petition for certiorari in January. Some thought the Court may t.......
Read More


Roundup of media coverage of Quanta v. LG decision
June 10, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
The media and legal blogs have begun to weigh in on yesterday's decision in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. , holding method claims can be exhausted by the sale of a product substantially embodying the claim. Click below for a sampling of the coverage from various sources. MediaNew York Times Wall Street Journal ($) Washington PostLaw.com Guardian (UK)Associated PressReuters San Jose Mercury.......
Read More


Quanta v. LG: Method claims can be exhausted; harder to assert infringement later in distribution
June 09, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
The Supreme Court today decided Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc., dealing with the doctrine of patent exhaustion (also called the first sale doctrine). In a nutshell, the Court made it more difficult for patent holders to maintain a claim for infringement down the distribution chain of a product. There were three main aspects to the decision:Method claims, like product claims, are subject to exhaus.......
Read More


Today's opinion in Quanta v. LG now available
June 09, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
The opinion of the Court in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. is now available here.Thanks to SCOTUSBlog for making a copy of the decision available online.Update (10:45): The closing paragraph of the decision is a good, concise summary:The authorized sale of an article that substantially embodies a patent exhausts the patent holder’s rights and prevents the patent holder from invoking patent .......
Read More


Suprme Court provides unanimous decision in Quanta v. LG: Federal Circuit reversed
June 09, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
This morning the Supreme Court decided Quanta v. LG, reversing the Federal Circuit's decision. We'll post a link to the decision (written by Justice Thomas) as soon as it's available.....
Read More


Supreme Court asks for government's view on whether it should hear sovereign immunity waiver case
April 22, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
In an order yesterday, the Supreme Court asked the Solicitor General's office to file a brief providing the government's views on whether it should grant certiorari in Biomedical Patent Management Corp. v. California Department of Health Services (No. 07-956). We previously blogged about the Federal Circuit's decision in this post. The case deals with whether state agencies waive their Eleventh A.......
Read More


Roundup of media coverage of oral arguments in Quanta v. LG
January 21, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
After the Supreme Court heard oral argument last week in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (No. 06-937), the media and blogosphere have begun to weigh in on the arguments. You can find our take on the arguments in this post, or click below for a sampling of the coverage from other sources. A decision is not expected until late spring. Media outlets Associated Press ReutersCNNWall Street Journal ($.......
Read More


Oral argument in Quanta v. LG - some highlights
January 18, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
On Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (No. 06-937), a case regarding the scope of the concept of patent exhaustion, also known as the first sale doctrine. While the entirety of the arguments is worth a read (the transcript is available here), click below for our impressions of the arguments.A bit of background is necessary in order to best understan.......
Read More


Tomorrow at the Supreme Court: Oral argument in Quanta v. LG
January 15, 2008
Post by Blog Staff
Tomorrow the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (No. 06-937). The case will determine whether patent owners who sell products embodying their patents conditionally are able to recover damages for patent infringement if the products are subsequently sold beyond the scope permitted by the original sale.The question presented is:Whether the Federal Circuit erred by.......
Read More


First wave of amicus briefs filed in Quanta v. LG, argument set for January 16
November 26, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
Earlier this month, amicus briefs either supporting the Petitioner or neither party were filed with the Supreme Court in connection with Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc (No. 06-937). Our previous coverage of the case can be found in these three posts. The Court also set oral argument for January 16, 2008.Some discussion of the amicus filings and links to the briefs after the jump.The question pr.......
Read More


Supreme Court to hear patent exhaustion case
September 25, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
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 other courts of appeals, that respondent's patent rights were not exhausted by it.......
Read More


Government recommends Supreme Court hear patent exhaustion case
September 06, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In a filing on August 24 (that got put on the back burner with the hubbub about the new continuation and claim limit rules), the government has recommended that the Supreme Court grant certiorari in Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (No. 06-937). Detail about the Federal Circuit's decision may be found in this post. The question presented is:Whether the Federal Circuit erred by holding, in conf.......
Read More


Supreme Court: vertical retail price maintenance no longer per se violation of antitrust law
July 02, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
Overruling a nearly century old decision, the Supreme Court Thursday held that a manufacturer may, in some instances, enter into a vertical agreement with its retailers to set minimum retail prices for the manufacturer's goods. The court overruled the venerable decision in Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U.S. 373 (1911), which held that such agreements were a per se violation of Sect.......
Read More


Roundup of media coverage of KSR and Microsoft
May 01, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
Below is a sampling of various media reports regarding yesterday's two Supreme Court patent decisions, KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc. and Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp.:"Court douses patent wildfire" (Chicago Tribune)"Ruling toughens patent process" (USA Today) "Patent protections tempered by Supreme Court rulings" (Los Angeles Times) "High court puts limits on pa.......
Read More


Supreme Court proposes revisions to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
April 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In can what only be described as a busy day at the Supreme Court, the Court, in addition to rendering opinions in five cases (including two patent cases, see here and here), also proposed revisions to the Federal Rules of Civil, Criminal, Bankruptcy, and Appellate Procedure. While the Rules of Appellate Procedure only have a single change (adding Rule 25(a)(5) relating to privacy protection), the Civil Rules .......
Read More


Initial thoughts on Microsoft v. AT&T, a.k.a. Deepsouth: the sequel
April 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In what could be termed a sequel to the Supreme Court's 1972 decision in Deepsouth Packing Co. v. Laitram Corp., the Court again found that if U.S. patent law is to extend its reach further into foreign acts, it must be Congress, not the courts, that extends it. The Court held that Microsoft's act of sending a "master" disk encoding Windows® abroad for installation on computers that would b.......
Read More


Initial thoughts on KSR v. Teleflex
April 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
After an initial reading of the opinion in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc., several issues jump out.There are four (4) reasons why the Federal Circuit's TSM test is no longer the exclusive test for obviousnessWhile the Court noted that the Federal Circuit's "teaching-suggestion-motivation" (TSM) test was not necessarily inconsistent with cases such as Graham, the Court provided four different.......
Read More


Today's opinions in KSR v. Teleflex and Microsoft v. AT&T
April 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
Click here for the opinion in KSR v. Teleflex.Click here for the opinion in Microsoft v. AT&T.More to come once we've had a chance to review the decisions. ....
Read More


Supreme Court reverses both KSR and Microsoft
April 30, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
As reported at SCOTUS Blog, the Supreme Court has today ruled in two cases, reversing decisions of the Federal Circuit.The first came in KSR v. Teleflex, where the Court has apparently ruled 9-0 that the Federal Circuit's view on obviousness is too narrow, reversing the decision that Teleflex's invention was nonobvious. Previous coverage of this case can be found here (preview), here (oral argument), a.......
Read More


Supreme Court asks for Government's view on yet another patent case
April 16, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
In its order list released today, the Supreme Court has indicated that it may accept yet another appeal in a patent-related case, as it has invited the Office of the Solicitor General to file a brief stating the position of the United States on the case. The case is Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc., and deals with the first sale doctrine in patent law. Specifically, the question presented in the .......
Read More


Roundup of media coverage of Microsoft v. AT&T oral arguments, more to come for Microsoft?
February 23, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
Now that the oral arguments before the Supreme Court have passed, various media outlets have had the opportunity to weigh in on the arguments and offer their predictions as to how the case will come out. A sampling of this media coverage is below: Seattle Post Intelligencer USA Today Boston Globe Houston Chronicle Forbes Los Angeles Times BBC News Wa.......
Read More


Interesting tidbits from today's oral argument in "Microsoft v. AT&T"
February 21, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
A few interesting exchanges took place in today's oral arguments before the Supreme Court in the Microsoft v. AT&T case. Click to read these portions of the arguments.The first related to jurisdiction. The parties had entered into a "high/low" settlement before the arguments, which essentially means that they have settled the case, but depending on how the Court comes out, the terms of the settlement will be dif.......
Read More


Supreme Court to hear oral arguments regarding scope of US patent law
February 21, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
This morning the Supreme Court will hear oral argument in Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp., a case about the potential extraterritorial reach of United States patent law. Specifically, the case deals with § 271(f)(1), which states that: (f)(1) Whoever without authority supplies or causes to be supplied in or from the United States all or a substantial portion of the components of.......
Read More


Roundup of media coverage of "MedImmune v. Genentech" decision
January 17, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
After last week's Supreme Court decision in MedImmune v. Genentech holding a patent licensee in good standing need not breach the license agreement in order to bring a claim that the patent is invalid, not infringed, or unenforceable, the media has begun to offer its perspective on the case. Below is a sampling of the media coverage, which basically is in agreement that the decision makes it easier to challen.......
Read More


Supreme Court: patent licensee need not cease royalty payments to challenge patent's vaildity
January 09, 2007
Post by Blog Staff
Today the Supreme Court decided MedImmune v. Genentech, a case about the power of federal courts to decide issues related to patent infringement and validity when one party to the dispute is currently licensing the patent from the other party. In an 8-1 decision, the Court held that a licensee need not stop paying royalties, thereby breaching the license agreement, in order for courts to have jurisdiction to con.......
Read More


Roundup of media coverage of "KSR v. Teleflex"
December 04, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
After last week's arguments before the Supreme Court in KSR v. Teleflex, the media has begun to offer its perspective on the case. Below is a sampling of the media coverage, which generally appears to think that the teaching-suggestion-motivation (TSM) test will either be scrapped entirely, or at least allow other ways to prove an invention is obvious, and therefore not patentable.New York TimesUSA TodayLos Angel.......
Read More


Supreme Court questions Federal Circuit's obviousness test: is it "gobbledygook"?
November 29, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
In oral argument before the Supreme Court in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., several Justices appeared uncomfortable with the Federal Circuit's "teaching-suggestion-motivation" (TSM) test for obviousness. Justice Scalia, in his typical direct style, characterized the TSM test at various times as "gobbledygook," "irrational," and "meaningless." Other Justices, .......
Read More


Supreme Court to hear key obviousness case today
November 28, 2006
Post by Blog Staff
This morning the Supreme Court will hear oral arguments in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., a potentially landmark case on the issue of obviousness in patent law. The case deals with adjustable automotive pedals in vehicles with electronic throttle controls. Teleflex sued KSR for infringement of patent no. 6,237,565. KSR asserted that the '565 patent was obvious, and the district court agreed, granting .......
Read More


View all Filewrapper® Posts

Search Posts

Purpose

The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.

Disclaimer

McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.

Connect with MVS

Enter your name and email address to recieve the latest news and updates from us and our attorneys.

Subscribe to: MVS Newsletter

Subscribe to: Filewrapper® Blog Updates

  I have read and agree to the terms and conditions of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C.