Clik here to view.
USA: Schoeller-Bleckmann Oilfield Equipment AG v. Churchill Drilling Tools...
Cheryl BeiseCCHThe Patent Trial and Appeal Board properly found during inter partes review (IPR) that two claims of a patent directed to a mechanism for controlling the operation of a downhole drill...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Tile Tech, Inc. v. United Construction Products, Inc, United States...
Cheryl BeiseCCHThe federal district court in Los Angeles did not err in granting default judgment and a permanent injunction to United Construction Products, Inc. dba Bison Innovative Products on its...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Bayer CropScience AG v. Dow AgroSciences LLC, United States Court of...
Cheryl BeiseThe federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware, did not abuse its discretion in finding that Bayer CropScience’s infringement suit against agrochemical rival Dow AgroSciences over...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services, United States Court of...
Cheryl BeiseThe Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in instituting Covered Business Method (“CBM”) review and finding several claims of a financing method patent owned by Credit Acceptance...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Home Semiconductor Corp. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd, United States...
Cheryl BeiseThe Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s construction of a key claim term in a patent directed to a method for fabricating a self-aligned contact hole in a semiconductor circuit was overbroad in...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: In re Smith International, Inc, United States Court of Appeals, Federal...
Cheryl BeiseThe Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s construction of the term “body” disclosed in multiple claims of a downhole drilling tool patent has been reversed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Ignite USA LLC v. CamelBak Products LLC, United States Court of Appeals,...
Cheryl BeiseFollowing inter partes review of several claims of a patent directed to a trigger/seal mechanism for a beverage container, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board properly applied the broadest...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Hospira, Inc., United States Court of...
Cheryl BeiseThe federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware, did not err in finding that several claims of a patent for preparing a stable formulation of the antibiotic compound ertapenem owned by...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Elbit Systems of America, LLC v. Thales Visiounix, Inc., United States...
Cheryl BeiseSubstantial evidence supported the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s finding that an inter partes review petitioner failed to show that a patent owned by Thales Visionix—claiming a method for...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: DSS Technology Management, Inc. v. Apple Inc., United States Court of...
Cheryl BeiseTwo final decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board—each finding that certain apparatus claims of a wireless communication network owned by DSS Technology Management were invalid as...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Maxon, LLC v. Funai Corporation, Inc., United States Court of Appeals,...
Cheryl BeiseThe federal district court in Chicago did not err in dismissing a patent infringement suit filed by Maxon, LLC against several smart television manufacturers on the ground that the asserted...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Ericsson Incorporated v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC, United States...
Cheryl BeiseThe Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s conclusion following inter partes review that a cellular communications patent directed to frequency hopping owned by Intellectual Ventures I LLC was...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Cortes-Ramos v. Martin-Morales, United States Court of Appeals, First...
Cheryl BeiseThe federal district court in San Juan, Puerto Rico, erred in dismissing copyright infringement, trademark infringement, and state law claims brought by a music contestant against pop...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Swartz v. Iancu, United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, No....
Cheryl BeiseThe federal district court in Alexandria, Virginia, properly dismissed an inventor’s appeal of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decisions rejecting six patent applications on the grounds...
View ArticleClik here to view.
USA: Yellowfin Yachts, Inc. v. Barker Boatworks, LLC, United States Court of...
Cheryl BeiseThe federal district court in Tampa did not err in deciding on summary judgment that fishing boat manufacturer Yellowfin Yachts failed to establish that a former executive and his company...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Patent case: MTD Products Inc. v. Iancu, USA
Cheryl BeiseBoard’s obviousness finding was predicated on erroneous finding that claim term “mechanical control assembly” was not a means-plus-function term. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Patent case: Henny Penny Corporation v. Frymaster LLC, USA
Cheryl BeiseThe Board properly found that a person skilled in the art would not be motivated to combine two prior art references and that industry praise supported a finding of nonbviousness....
View ArticleClik here to view.
Patent case: BedGear LLC v. Fredman Bros. Furniture Co. Inc., USA
Cheryl BeiseThree PTAB decisions were decided by APJs invalidly appointed, but two Circuit Judges would find the defect wholly cured by Federal Circuit’s recent Arthrex decision. The U.S. Court of...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Patent case: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. v. Accord Healthcare,...
Because the patent failed to disclose the absence of a loading dose, the no-loading-dose limitation was without adequate written description support. A divided Federal Circuit panel has reconsidered...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Patent case: Thryv, Inc. v. Click-to-Call Technologies LP, USA
Expanding on its 2016 Cuozzo decision, the U.S. Supreme Court holds that the “no appeal” provision of 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) precludes judicial review of the agency’s application of Section 315(b)’s time...
View Article