Federal Circuit reaffirms anticipatory reference must have all elements as arranged in the claim In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of indefiniteness but reversed the district court's holding of anticipation of other claims. The district court held the means-plus-function limitations did not have corresponding structure disclosed in the specification, rendering them indefinite, and that the combination of two examples in a prior art […] Continue Reading →
Bilski decided The decision is available here. It adopts the "machine-or-transformation" test for patentable subject matter. As stated by the majority: The machine-or-transformation test is a two-branched inquiry; an applicant may show that a process claim satisfies § 101 either by showing that his claim is tied to a particular machine, or by showing that his claim […] Continue Reading →
BPAI: 102(e) art can be effective prior art as of provisional priority date In a decision recently designated precedential, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences considered the question of whether a reference that is prior art under § 102(e) is prior art as of its provisional priority date or the actual filing date of the reference. In affirming the examiner, the Board determined the reference was prior […] Continue Reading →
If no anticompetitive effect outside exclusionary zone of patent, reverse payment OK in ANDA cases In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit upheld the district court's grant of summary judgment in an antitrust case. At issue was whether reverse payments (from the patentee to the accused infringer) in the context of the Hatch-Waxman Act violated antitrust laws. The Federal Circuit observed that "[t]he essence of the inquiry is whether the […] Continue Reading →
Jury’s pre-KSR nonobviousness verdict reversed post-KSR In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of a judgment as a matter of law that the asserted claims of a patent were obvious after a jury verdict of no obviousness. KSR was decided after the jury's verdict but before the district court ruled on the defendant's motion for judgment […] Continue Reading →
Remittitur without new trial requires legal error, not error as a matter of law In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's reduction of the jury's damages award, remanding the case for a new trial on damages, and affirmed the jury's verdict of willful infringement and the district court's award of attorney fees under § 285. The district court held there was insufficient evidence as a […] Continue Reading →
Tenth anniversary of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act On October 28, 1998, President Clinton signed the Digital Millenium Copyright Act into law. The Act is probably best known for two of its provisions: (1) the anti-cirumvention provsion, which prohibits circumventing a "technological measure that effectively controls access to" a copyrighted work, and (2) the online "safe harbor" provision, which generally insulates parties that […] Continue Reading →
ITC cannot enter limited exclusion order against non-parties In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit vacated a limited exclusion order issued by the International Trade Commission in the most recent dispute between Qualcomm and Broadcom. The case involved alleged infringement of one of Broadcom's patents relating to chips for wireless communication, specifically directed toward power saving technology. Although Qualcomm was the only […] Continue Reading →
Eleventh Circuit: Website in Tennessee using Floridian’s trademark sufficient for jurisdiction In a decision last week, the Eleventh Circuit reversed a district court's dismissal of a trademark infringement case for lack of personal jurisdiction. The district court held that the allegedly infringing conduct, operating a website, was insufficient to warrant jurisdiction in the plaintiff's home state of Florida. Here, the plaintiff was an individual, and the […] Continue Reading →
High materiality without explanation for nondisclosure leads to inference of intent to deceive In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's finding of inequitable conduct for one patent but reversed on a second, affirmed a finding of no invalidity of the second patent, but vacated the finding of infringement after modifying the district court's claim construction of a claim term. The court also reversed the […] Continue Reading →