Supreme Court Upholds Broadest Reasonable Interpretation and No Review for Institution in PTAB Proceedings 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 […] Continue Reading →
Under Pressure: The State of Sampling in the Music Industry Earlier this month, Madonna won the appeal of a copyright infringement lawsuit before the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The plaintiff, VMG Salsoul LTD., alleged that a tiny (0.23 second!) sample of the horns from the song “Love Break“was used in Madonna’s song “Vogue.‚¬ The majority held that the sample was too small to be […] Continue Reading →
Supreme Court Issues Decision on Treble Damages 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 […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB Obviousness Decision for the Board’s Failure to Adequately Articulate an Obviousness Rationale In Black & Decker, Inc. v. Positec USA, Inc., a non-precedential opinion, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent and Trial Appeal Board’s (PTAB) finding of obviousness of two claims. The appeal arose from an Inter Partes Review (IPR) of U.S. Patent No. 5,544,417 owned by Black & Decker directed to a string trimmer. The PTAB […] Continue Reading →
Supreme Court Revisits Standard for Awarding Attorneys’ Fees in Copyright Cases 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 […] Continue Reading →
Tracking the Mayo Effect: Study Examines Personalized Medicine Patent Applications after SCOTUS Decision The US Supreme Court decided Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs. in 2012, effectively redefining the scope of patent eligible subject matter, particularly with respect to biotechnology and personalized medicine. Subsequent decisions by the Court in Myriad and Alice have confirmed what many prognosticators had predicted: a wide-spread broadening of the judicially-created exceptions to patent […] Continue Reading →
PTAB’s Interpretation of 35 USC 315(b) Continues to Stand: Dismissal Without Prejudice Effectively Nullifies the One Year Bar to Bring an IPR The USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s holding that the voluntary dismissal of a lawsuit, without prejudice, effectively nullifies the service of the complaint for purposes of triggering the one year bar in 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) to petition for the institution of an inter partes review (IPR) stands in Shaw Indus. Grp. v. Automated […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Recognizes Patent “Agent”Privilege The attorney-client privilege has not previously been extended to cover communications between U.S. patent applicants and non-attorney patent agents. That is about to change. In a recent decision, In re: Queen’s University at Kingston, the Federal Circuit recognized that communications between U.S. patent applicants and non-attorney patent agents should receive some degree of privilege. In […] Continue Reading →
Does Spotify Owe You Money? Streaming Service Sued for $150 Million in Unpaid Royalties David Lowery, the frontman of Cracker and Camper Van Beethoven, has recently filed a class action lawsuit seeking at least $150 million dollars in damages against Spotify. Lowry alleges Spotify knowingly, willingly, and unlawfully reproduces and distributes copyrighted compositions without obtaining mechanical licenses. According to the complaint, which was filed December 28th in the Central […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Clarifies Rules for IPR Supplemental Information Submission The America Invents Act (AIA) created a number of new pseudo-litigation proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the USPTO. While the proceedings, including inter-partes review (IPR), have been in place since September 16, 2012, the specific rules and procedures, as well as the underlying authority, continue to be resolved. On December […] Continue Reading →