Features
Matthew Siegal
&
Adam Sapper
The successful plaintiff in a design patent infringement case is entitled to recover the greater of the defendant's profits or its own damages, regardless of how the jury desires to apportion the award. Thus, in <i>Nordock, Inc. v. Systems Inc.,</i> the Federal Circuit ordered a new damages trial on the grounds that the amount of defendant's profits assessed by the jury was not supported by the evidence or in accordance with the law.
Features
Judith L. Grubner
When is a graphic design a "work of authorship" that, when incorporated into the design of a useful article, is "identified separately from, and ' capable of existing independently of, the utilitarian aspects of the article"? In deciding that the designs on cheerleader uniforms were more like copyrightable fabric designs than unprotectable garment designs, the Sixth Circuit undertook a lengthy analysis of "separability.
Scott Graham
Microsoft Corp. and Google Inc. have buried the hatchet on five years of patent litigation.The companies issued a joint statement on Sept. 30 announcing the conclusion of 20 cases being litigated in the United States and Europe. The agreement comes a week after a U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit decision resolving one of their most prominent disputes.
Corinna Alanis
The Federal Circuit, in <i>Suprema, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n,</i>, overturned a 2013 divided panel decision and held that a Section 337 violation based on induced infringement is viable where the underlying direct infringement occurs after importation.
Features
Randi Isaacs, Stacy Fredrich
&
Alyssa Walker
University technology transfer offices (TTOs) bridge the gap between innovation and commercialization by identifying ways to protect university-generated innovations from unauthorized exploitation, by obtaining the appropriate protection for such innovations, and by facilitating commercialization of these innovations. For-profit companies worldwide engage in a similar process; however, universities face unique challenges in these efforts.
Features
David L. Walker
&
Angela L. Morrison
On June 12, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in <i>Ariosa Diagnostics,</i> affirmed a grant of summary judgment of invalidity of another patent in the biotech space. The decision adds to a long and growing list of patents that have fallen in the wake of the Supreme Court's recent 35 U.S.C. '101 jurisprudence.
Columns & Departments
Howard J. Shire
&
Brent T. Hagen
Federal Circuit: In An IPR Proceeding, The Burden Lies With The Petitioner To Show 'Substantial Evidence' That The Prior Art Patent Is Entitled To The Priority Date Of Its Provisional Application<br>Federal Circuit: Scope Of Reexamination Claims Is Reviewed De Novo
Features
Elizabeth B. Hagan
&
David K. Tellekson
Having been urged to do so by the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit recently expanded liability under 35 U.S.C. '271(a) for direct infringement of a method patent involving more than one actor (divided infringement).
Features
Robert R. Sachs
<i>Versata Development Group v. SAP America</i> was a closely watched case since it was the first appeal to the Federal Circuit of a Covered Business Methods review by the PTAB under Section 18 of the America Invents Act. This article addresses the court's reasoning regarding the definitions of a covered business method patent, and how that reasoning is at odds with norms of statutory construction, technological innovation, and claim drafting.
Columns & Departments
Jeffrey S. Ginsberg
Federal Circuit: District Courts Must Address <i>Intel</i> Factors In Determining Whether to Modify A Protective Order In Foreign Proceedings <br>Federal Circuit Applies An 'Abuse of Discretion' Standard of Review for a PTO 'Special Circumstances' Determination
