Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Federal Circuit Remands PTAB Decision Due to Claim Construction Change
On June 10, 2016, a Federal Circuit panel of Judges Newman, Chen and Stoll issued a majority opinion, authored by Judge Stoll, in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Complementsoft, LLC, Case Nos. 2015-1346 and 2015-1347. The panel vacated-in-part the PTAB's decision on patentability in an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding and remanded due to the PTAB's adoption of a new claim construction in its final written decision that differed significantly from that offered in its institution decision.
SAS filed its petition to review the patentability of ComplementSoft's U.S. Patent No. 7,110,936 (“the '936 patent”). SAS's petition challenged all 16 claims of the '936 patent as being unpatentable. The PTAB instituted IPR for claims 1 and 3-10. In its institution decision, the PTAB construed certain terms of the '936 patent. In particular, the term “graphical representations of data flows” was construed to mean “a depiction of a map of the path of data through the executing source code.”
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?