Voluntary dismissal prevents award of attorney fees under § 285 In a recent case, the Federal Circuit found that when a plaintiff voluntarily dismisses its case under Rule 41(a)(1)(i) before an answer is served, the defendant is not a “prevailing party.” As a result, attorney fees under § 285 could not be awarded by the district court. More details of the case after the jump. RFR […] Continue Reading →
No Crying Over Spilled Milk – Held to Claim Construction During Prosecution Nouri Hakim appealed the decisions of the District Court of Western Louisiana granting Cannon Avent Group’s motion for summary judgment that Avent did not infringe one of Hakim’s patents (“the ‘931 patent“) and finding another of Hakim’s patents invalid (“the ‘620 patent“). The patents-in-suit involved the art of non-spill drinking cups and the apparatus in […] Continue Reading →
Roundup of media coverage of Microsoft v. AT&T oral arguments, more to come for Microsoft? 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 […] Continue Reading →
Government contractor entitled to patent infringement immunity The Federal Circuit ruled today that a contractor working for the government was entitled to immunity from a patent infringement suit under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a). The contractor was hired to clean up various sites contaminated by hazardous waste, and the terms of the contract required the contractor to use a particular method to perform […] Continue Reading →
Interesting tidbits from today’s oral argument in “Microsoft v. AT&T” 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 […] Continue Reading →
On this date: 1842 William Greenough patents the first sewing machine. Patent available at the USPTO here, and at Google here. Continue Reading →
Supreme Court to hear oral arguments regarding scope of US patent law 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 […] Continue Reading →
Don’t change horses in midstream: Patentee held to claim construction position taken at lower court The Federal Circuit ruled today that a patentee could not argue a different claim construction than that argued before the district court. Because of this, the court affirmed the lower court’s grant of summary judgment of noninfringement against the patent holder. Also, the court held that the patent holder did have standing to bring the […] Continue Reading →
Where is the real “Icebox of the Nation”? In what can only be described as a chilling trademark dispute, the cities of International Falls, Minnesota and Fraser, Colorado are battling over the right to call their respective cities the "Icebox of the Nation." At issue is International Falls' trademark registration, number 1599660, for "COLD WEATHER TESTED CITY OF INTERNATIONAL FALLS IN THE ICEBOX […] Continue Reading →
Patent reform legislation: is this year the year? Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee held a hearing on the possibility of reform of the U.S. Patent system. Given that the title of the hearing was “American Innovation at Risk: The Case for Patent Reform,” it’s easy to surmise that the general theme of the hearing was that reform is needed. Dennis Crouch at Patently-O […] Continue Reading →