Patent cases in 2006 result in over $1 billion in damages awarded According to a study released by Bloomberg, United States juries in patent cases awarded a total of over $1 billion in damages in cases that went to jury trial in 2006, the largest single year ever. The largest award went to Rambus, a California maker of computer memory chips, who won a $307 million verdict […] Continue Reading →
Another claim construction reversal: Claim not limited to preferred embodiment In a split decision, the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s judgment of noninfringement based on error in claim construction. The patent at issue involves a machine and method that automate the staining of microscope slides used in biological assays. The district court construed the claims narrowly based on the preferred embodiment described in the […] Continue Reading →
Working until the end of the year, Federal Circuit addresses a Law School Exam Type Case The Federal Circuit affirmed a Southern District of Indiana decision that generic drug makers IVAX Pharmaceuticals, Inc, Dr. Reddy’s Labratories, Ltd. (DRL) and Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. infringed Eli Lilly and Company’s (Lilly) U.S. Patent no. 5,229,382. The ‘382 Patent claims chemical compound olanzapine and the use of the compound to treat schizophrenia. The infringers […] Continue Reading →
New GAO report suggests that some patents may hamper development of new “innovative” drugs A report released by the Government Accountability Office indicates that while expenditures on research and development by drug companies have increased, this has not resulted in a commensurate increase in new drug applications (NDAs) with the FDA. In fact, NDAs have decreased by 21% from 1999 to 2004. The larger concern raised by the report […] Continue Reading →
Starbucks appeals denial of cancellation of Korean company’s trademark Starbucks is appealing a decision denying cancellation of a Korean company's trademark, asserting it infringes Starbucks' trademark. The Korean company, Starpreya, uses a green circular logo that Starbucks asserts is confusingly similar to its logo. Below are the two logos: Starbucks has already unsuccessfully opposed Starpreya's mark in two cases before the Patent Court of […] Continue Reading →
New Tool for Copyright Owners The Wall Street Journal has posted an article highlighting a new internet tool that tracks copyrighted works being used on the internet. Privately held Attributor Corp. of Redwood City, California offers a search service that scans billions of pages of the internet looking for infringing uses of copyrighted material. Attributor Corp describes its self as […] Continue Reading →
Protecting a business name: the basics MSNBC has published an article with some basic tips for businesses to protect their trade names as trademarks. While the suggestions are fairly generic, it does at least provide some simple guidance for individuals who do not have any experience with intellectual property law in general or trademark law in particular. This piece is similar […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit Addresses On Sale Bar In Plumtree Software, Inc. v. Datamize, LLC, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals revisited the issue of determining when an invention is on sale within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 102(b). A claimed invention is considered to be on sale under ? 102(b) if the invention is sold or offered for sale more than one […] Continue Reading →
UK considering peer review for patent system After a review of Great Britain’s intellectual property laws, the UK patent office is considering implementing a peer review procedure as part of its patent examining process. This was one of the recommendations of the Gowers Review of Intellectual Property, published on December 6. The idea is based in part on the Peer to Patent […] Continue Reading →
Federal Circuit considers intent required for inducing infringement en banc The Federal Circuit resolved a perceived conflict in its case law regarding the necessary level of intent required for a defendant to be found liable for inducing infringement of a patent. The court considered one subsection of DSU Medical Corp. v. JMS Co. en banc to resolve the conflict. The court held that to prove […] Continue Reading →