ARE Litigation Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Confirms “Clear and Convincing†Evidence Standard Applies to Validity Challenges for Patents
(June 9, 2011) On June 9, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court confirmed that the presumption of validity under 35 U.S.C. § 282 requires an accused infringer to meet a “clear and convincing” standard to prevail on an invalidity defense in Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, No. 10-290, 564 U.S. __ (S.Ct. Jun. 9, 2011). […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert:
US Supreme Court Grants Cert for the Second Time in Prometheus v. Mayo Case on Patent-Eligible Subject Matter
The U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari for the second time in Prometheus Labs., Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Servs., 628 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2010) ("Prometheus II"), cert. granted, No. 10-1150, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 4764 (U.S. June 20, 2011) to address the issue of whether and in what circumstances a patent claim should be held invalid for […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Addresses Knowledge Element of Claims for Inducing Patent Infringement
On May 31, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., No. 10-6, 563 U.S. __ (S. Ct. May 31, 2011) which addresses the knowledge requirement in a claim for inducing patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The statute provides that one who actively induces another to […]
Intent must be pleaded with particularity for false marking claim in use
In re BP Lubricants USA Inc., Misc. Dkt. No 960, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, 2011 US App. LEXIS 5015, 15 March 2011 Abstract Intent must be pleaded with particularity to state a false marking claim under 35 USC §292 in the USA. Legal context Following Forest Group, Inc. […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert:
U.S. Supreme Court find Bayh-Dole Act Does Not Override Employees’ Rights to Unassigned Inventions
On June 6, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc., 563 U.S. __ (2011), a case related to the rights of inventors in federally-funded research programs. In Stanford, the Court rejected Stanford’s position that when an invention is conceived […]
A Comprehensive and Extensive Collection of Legal Principles on Patent Opinions Under US Patent Laws
Before the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rewrote US patent law on wilful infringement in In re Seagate Technology, LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007), it was quite commonplace for formal legal opinions to be sought and obtained by those concerned with potential accusations of infringement of patents that were brought […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert:
U.S. Supreme Court Addresses Knowledge Element of Claims for Inducing Patent Infringement
On May 31, 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A., No. 10-6, 563 U.S. __ (S. Ct. May 31, 2011) which addresses the knowledge requirement in a claim for inducing patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). The statute provides that one who actively induces another to […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert: Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Another False Marking Case and Clarifies Meaning of “Patented Articleâ€
On April 29, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued another decision further clarifying the law on false patent marking under 35 U.S.C. § 292. In Juniper Networks, Inc. v. Shipley, No. 2010-1327, Slip op. (Fed. Cir. Apr. 29, 2011), the Court affirmed the dismissal with prejudice of an amended complaint alleging a […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert:
Federal Circuit Takes A Second Divided Infringement Case En Banc
On May 26, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit continued signaling its intention to reevaluate the state of the law regarding divided infringement when it agreed to hear McKesson Technologies Inc. v. Epic Systems Corp. en banc on an expedited schedule in view of the pending en banc review of Akamai […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert: Federal Circuit Takes On Divided Infringement Issue
On April 20, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit granted a petition for rehearing en banc in Akamai Technologies., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., No. 2009-1372, -1380 , -1416, -1417, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 8167, at *2 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 20, 2011) to address the question: If separate entities each perform […]