Filewrapper

Anticipation no longer the epitome of obviousness? Claims can be anticipated but nonobvious

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court's finding of non-willful infringement for one product, reversed its claim construction and related finding of noninfringement of a second product, and vacated its judgment as a matter of law on the issue of anticipation. The district court, at the charge conference near the end of the jury […]

Continue Reading →

Inducement not shown when accused product can work in an infringing way but doesn’t have to

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the International Trade Commission's finding of noninfringement with respect to one patent but reversed and remanded on another. At issue was whether the defendant had imported chipsets that infringed five of the plaintiff's patents in violation of 19 U.S.C. § 1337. The action was dismissed with regard […]

Continue Reading →

General disclosure in prior art not enabling for specific pharmaceutical compound’s use in treatment

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's holding that a prior art patent was not enabling and thus did not anticipate the patent-in-suit. Applying the In re Wands factors, the district court held undue experimentation would be required in order to produce the claimed invention based on the prior art's […]

Continue Reading →

Advice of counsel evidence still relevant to intent to induce infringement

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury's finding of infringement of two patents and the related injunction, but reversed the district court's claim construction and the concomitant finding of infringement regarding a third patent. The court affirmed the district court's injunction despite the fact that the patentee licensed, rather than manufactured, the […]

Continue Reading →

Expert’s internally inconsistent testimony could not support jury’s infringement verdict

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's denial of judgment as a matter of law after a jury returned a verdict of infringement. The Federal Circuit held the jury's verdict was not supported by substantial evidence, and that the plaintiffs' expert's opinions contradicted his factual testimony, and was thus incapable […]

Continue Reading →

Inventor testimony regarding intent during patent prosecution irrelevant to claim construction

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit vacated a stipulated judgment of noninfringement on claim construction grounds. The construction issue dealt with the significance of a limitation that applied to an "at least one" element. Specifically, the relevant claim required "at least one condylar element," where "the condylar element" had certain features. The district court […]

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit affirms district court’s decision setting aside $1.5 billion infringement verdict

In a decision yesterday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's grant of judgment as a matter of law based on lack of standing for one patent and non-infringement of a second patent. A jury awarded $1,538,056,702 in damages for infringement, but, as a result of the JMOL, the district court set aside the damages […]

Continue Reading →

When factual inquiries underlying obviousness determination disputed, summary judgment improper

In a decision Friday, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's summary judgment of no anticipation, no invalidity for failure to comply with the written description requirement, and infringement, but reversed the district court's summary judgment of no invalidity based on obviousness. In an unusual procedural move, the parties stipulated that for the issues on […]

Continue Reading →

Assertions of infringment at trade show sufficient to confer personal jurisdiction in DJ action

In a recent decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court's order dismissing a case for lack of personal jurisdiction. The plaintiff brought a declaratory judgment action against the defendant patent holder in Washington. After sending a letter accusing the plaintiff of infringing two patents, the patent holder attempted to get the plaintiff's display removed […]

Continue Reading →

Patent exhaustion does not create a cuse of action; dismissal affirmed

In a decision last week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's decision dismissing a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiff brought suit when it believed the patent holder had fraudulently concealed a second licensee of the same patents. The plaintiff was a licensee of the defendant patent holder and therefore could […]

Continue Reading →

Stay in Touch

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

Sign Up