IP LAWSUITS

In an opinion by Judge Chen in Nike, Inc. v. Adidas AG 14-1542 (Feb. 11, 2016), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) vacated the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (“the Board”) decision to deny Nike’s motion to add four substitute claims to U.S. Patent No. 7,347,011... read more
In a recent decision, the Northern District of California decided that a patent owner’s submissions in an inter partes review constituted a prosecution disclaimer for claim construction purposes. Based in part on prosecution estoppel, the court found on summary judgement that the defendant did not... read more
On December 1, 2015, amendments to certain rules of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure went into effect. For a better understanding of the new amendments, I have set forth a breakdown of the primary amendments to the rules and the purpose of those amendments.Rule AmendmentPurposeRule 1:... read more
Between declining gas prices and the controversy over the increased incidence of earthquakes, the state of the Oklahoma oil and gas industry, particularly the use of hydraulic fracturing, or “fracking,” seems to be a daily local news topic. A decision last week in the United States District Court... read more
Can a monkey acquire intellectual property rights in a selfie? On Wednesday, a federal judge answered this question in the negative, ruling that there is no indication that the protection of the United States Copyright Act extends to animals. The judge went on to state, “This is an issue for... read more
With the beginning of a new year, I thought it would be interesting to review district court decisions on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in 2015. Of particular interest were pre-trial decisions on motions that were dispositive of the patent subject matter eligibility question. Using... read more
On December 17, 2015, a jury in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria Division) found cable and Internet provider Cox Communications, Inc., (“Cox”) liable for contributory infringement as a result of Cox’s subscribers illegally downloading and sharing music files... read more
TDE Petroleum Data Solutions, Inc. (“TDE”) has filed an appeal of a District Court decision1 that invalidated TDE’s patent using the Supreme Court’s logic set forth in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 189 L. Ed. 2d 296, 82 L. Ed. 2d 296 (2014). TDE provides services that... read more
The Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion today in MCM Portfolio v. Hewlett-Packard Co. (Fed. Cir. 2015) (“MCM” and “HP” respectively), holding that the Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) system does not violate Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.MCM is the owner of... read more
Between the 2016 Presidential Primary Debates and the recent tragedy in Colorado Springs, it seems Planned Parenthood has been central to many current political discussions. The organization also recently made news in legal circles for something the Supreme Court chose not to do. In New Hampshire... read more
At the end of October, the Supreme Court announced that it will review the issue of when enhanced damages may be awarded to a patentee with a finding of infringement.  Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, U.S., No. 14-1520, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., U.S., No. 14-1513.In 2007, the... read more
FanDuel’s growing list of legal woes got a little bit longer when Washington Redskins receiver Pierre Garçon filed a putative class-action lawsuit1 against the daily fantasy sports company on October 30. Garçon’s suit is one of the latest in a rough couple of months legally for the fantasy sports... read more
 In June of this year, we noted that the Eastern District of Texas began requiring a showing of good cause and leave from the Court if a defendant wanted to file a dispositive motion under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (i.e., an allegation of patent claim invalidity for non-statutory subject matter) before... read more
 In June of this year, we noted that the Eastern District of Texas began requiring a showing of good cause and leave from the Court if a defendant wanted to file a dispositive motion under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (i.e., an allegation of patent claim invalidity for non-statutory subject matter) before... read more
On October 16, 2015, as a result of a District Court case in Wisconsin, Apple was ordered to pay the Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation (WARF), the University of Wisconsin-Madison's patent licensing body, more than $234 million in damages for incorporating WARF’s “Table Based Data Speculation... read more