Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Newswire

Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Newswire

Comprehensive Real-Time News Feed for Federal Circuit Court of Appeals.

Results 1 - 20 of 1,068 in Federal Circuit Court of Appeals

  1. Only Basic Functions of a Processor Avoid Need for Disclosed...Read the original story w/Photo

    9 hrs ago | JD Supra

    Only Basic Functions of a Processor Avoid Need for Disclosed Algorithm - EON Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC Addressing the question of what corresponding structure must be disclosed to support a means-plus-function claim element, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a district court finding that eight computer-implemented means-plus-function elements were indefinite because the specification failed to disclose any algorithms.

    Comment?

  2. No Induced Infringement Where Off-Label Use of a Drug Is Not...Read the original story w/Photo

    9 hrs ago | JD Supra

    No Induced Infringement Where Off-Label Use of a Drug Is Not "Inevitable" - Takeda Pharms. U.S.A., Inc. v.

    Comment?

  3. Activities For sNDA and Citizen's Petition Protected by...Read the original story w/Photo

    16 hrs ago | JD Supra

    In a case addressing the "safe harbor" provision of 35 U.S.C. 271 , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that information submitted to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the purpose of filing a citizen's petition and a supplemental New Drug Application is covered by the safe-harbor exemption, but remanded to determine whether other post-filing activities infringed the plaintiff's patent. Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v.

    Comment?

  4. No "Apportionment" Requirement for Design Patent Damages - Apple, ...Read the original story w/Photo

    Yesterday | jdsupra.com

    Addressing the issue of damages for trade dress and design patents, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the bulk of Apple's roughly $930 million damages award, noting that there is no apportionment required for design patent based damages. Apple, Inc. v.

    Comment?

  5. Danielle Anne Phillip, Shareholder, Brinks Gilson & Lione to Speak at KC's EventRead the original story

    Yesterday | PR Log

    PRLog - July 2, 2015 - NEW YORK -- The Knowledge Group/The Knowledge Congress Live Webcast Series, the leading producer of regulatory focused webcasts, has announced today that Danielle Anne Phillip, Shareholder will speak at the Knowledge Congress' webcast entitled: "Patent Infringement: Proving Royalty Damages Under Increased Federal and District Court Scrutiny: A 2015 LIVE Webcast" . This event is scheduled for July 13, 2015 from 12:00pm - 2:00pm .

    Comment?

  6. A Single Entity Must Perform All Steps of a Method Claim in Order to...Read the original story w/Photo

    Yesterday | JD Supra

    A Single Entity Must Perform All Steps of a Method Claim in Order to Commit Direct Infringement - Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. Following a remand from the Supreme Court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed its prior panel decision, holding that direct infringement liability of a method claim under 271 U.S.C. 271 only exists when all of the steps of a claim are performed by or attributed to a single entity .

    Comment?

  7. Federal Circuit Invalidates Another Diagnostic PatentRead the original story w/Photo

    Yesterday | JD Supra

    In Ariosa Diagnostics, Inc. v. Sequenom, Inc. , Slip Op. 2014-1139, 2014-114 , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that Sequenom's U.S. Patent No.

    Comment?

  8. Intellectual Property Alert: Federal Circuit Holds Claims Indefinite ...Read the original story w/Photo

    Thursday | JD Supra

    On June 18, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit released its decision in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc .i The case was on remand from the Supreme Court, which vacated the Federal Circuit's earlier determination regarding the definiteness of claims directed towards Copaxone, Teva's market-approved treatment for multiple sclerosis.ii The Supreme Court held that claim construction is a question of law subject to de novo review, and that the underlying factual findings are subject to clear error review.iii Based on the Supreme Court's guidance in Teva and Nautilus, Inc. v.

    Comment?

  9. The B&B Hardware Case and its Potential Impact on Trademark LitigationRead the original story w/Photo

    Thursday | JD Supra

    ... a ruling of the TTAB, that party has two options; it can either appeal the decision to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, or it can seek review de novo in a federal District Court. In the case of B&B Hardware , two separate entities were using ...

    Comment?

  10. Web trademarks: It's not the words, it's the actionRead the original story w/Photo

    Thursday | jdsupra.com

    In the old days, you obtained nationwide priority for your trademark only through federal registration. But does the Internet now give you an easier path to nationwide priority, just by posting your mark on a nationally accessible website? David Couture applied in 2008 to register the mark PLAYDOM.

    Comment?

  11. General Jurisdiction After DaimlerRead the original story

    Thursday | PrawfsBlawg

    In Daimler AG v. Bauman and Goodyear v. Brown , the Supreme Court held that corporations do not subject themselves to general--or "all purpose"--jurisdiction simply by conducting continuous business in a state.

    Comment?

  12. ION Announces Ruling in Appeal on WesternGeco Patent Infringement LawsuitRead the original story

    Thursday | Sys-Con Media

    ION Geophysical Corporation , in , alleging that ION's DigiFINa lateral streamer control system infringed numerous method and apparatus claims contained in patents held by WesternGeco U.S. for marine seismic streamer steering devices. In in damages, prejudgment interest and costs to WesternGeco, plus post-judgment interest.

    Comment?

  13. Federal Circuit Expands Century-Old Preclusion RuleRead the original story w/Photo

    Wednesday Jul 1 | Law.com

    A year after dusting off a century-old Supreme Court precedent that bars the relitigation of certain patent infringement claims against manufacturers, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit this week extended it to the manufacturers' customers. The court held that under the so-called Kessler doctrine, when a court finds a product non-infringing, the patent holder is precluded from bringing new patent suits not only against the manufacturer of the product, but also the customers who use it.

    Comment?

  14. Bernstein Shur Business and Commerical Litigation Newsletter #52Read the original story w/Photo

    Wednesday Jul 1 | JD Supra

    We are pleased to present the 52nd edition of the Bernstein Shur Business and Commercial Litigation Newsletter. This month, we highlight recent cases that address the consequences of failure to adhere to a court's brief formatting rules and expansion of liability of investment advisors under state securities laws.

    Comment?

  15. Supreme Court Refuses To Reconsider API Copyright DecisionRead the original story w/Photo

    Tuesday Jun 30 | I programmer

    In the latest twist to the Oracle versus Google lawsuit over Java and Android, the Supreme Court has declined to consider Google's petition to reconsider the issue of copyright, essentially finding in favor of Oracle. The legal battle between Oracle and Google over the Android OS has been ongoing for almost four years.

    Comment?

  16. EFF Stands With Innovative Developers in the Wake of Oracle v. GoogleRead the original story w/Photo

    Tuesday Jun 30 | Eff.org

    EFF, along with leading computer scientists and copyright practitioners, thinks the Federal Circuit got it wrong: the legal precedents that the Federal Circuit refused to follow, as well as the realities of software development, argue against treating application programming interfaces as copyrightable. And while the case , we're worried that litigious, well-heeled software companies will begin to threaten innovative developers with lawsuits, or demand license fees, when they create interoperable software by using or re-implementing an API.

    Comment?

  17. Kickstarter Wins Legal Battle to Protect Crowdfunding from Patent ThreatsRead the original story w/Photo

    Tuesday Jun 30 | Hollywood Reporter

    Kickstarter has successfully defended the technological process by which it has built a popular crowdfunding platform. On Monday, a New York judge ruled in its favor in a four-year-long patent fight.

    Comment?

  18. Supreme Court Sends Google-Oracle Feud Back to SF JudgeRead the original story w/Photo

    Monday Jun 29 | Law.com

    The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday rejected Google Inc.'s petition for certiorari in its copyright dispute with Oracle Corp. over the Java application programming interface. That ruling upholds a 2014 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit that held the Java APIs copyrightable.

    Comment?

  19. The Upload: Your tech news briefing for Tuesday, June 30Read the original story

    Tuesday Jun 30 | ComputerWorld

    Hoping to avoid a third strike against it, the U.S. Office of Personnel Management has taken offline a system used for performing background checks on potential new hires . The agency discovered a security flaw in the web app, E-QIP, while auditing its IT systems after two spectacular hacks resulted in the theft of personnel records of millions of government employees and the security clearance questionnaires of many others.

    Comment?

  20. High court steers clear of Google-Oracle battleRead the original story w/Photo

    Tuesday Jun 30 | Philly.com

    ... in dispute could not be covered by copyright law, but an appeals court disagreed. The U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals last year concluded that the technology could be protected; the Java components belong to a category of software tools known ...

    Comment?