Today, the United States Supreme Court issued its decision in Teva v. Sandoz regarding the standard of review on claim construction. A majority held that rather than a de novo review, the Court of Appeals must review claim construction for ‘clear error’.
Tag Archives: United States
Standard Essential Patents
Earlier today, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit released its decision in Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Systems, Inc. relating to standard essential patents on the 802.11(n) wireless standard. Ericsson had committed to RAND license terms on its patents and the court considered what RAND royalty rate would be appropriate.
Third Round
On Friday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu LLC that the claims to a method of distributing copyrighted media over the Internet were directed to unpatentable subject matter . The U.S. Supreme Court had previously remanded the proceeding back to the CAFC after Myriad and again after Alice when, in both previous cases, the court had found the claims patentable. Continue reading Third Round
Comparative Biologics
Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Abbvie Deutschland Gmbh & Co. v. Janssen Biotech, Inc. relating to patents on directed to antibodies that bind to and neutralize the activity of human interleukin 12. The CAFC found there was sufficient evidence for the jury to find the patents invalid for lack of written description.
US Performance Rights
A majority of the United States Supreme Court ruled in American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo, Inc. that Aereo transmits a performance to the public by sending television signals it receives over the air from individual antennas to subscribers over the internet.
Alice v CLS Bank
The United States Supreme Court affirmed the en banc CAFC decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l that the claims were directed to a patent-ineligible abstract idea.
US Supreme Court on Patents
Today, the United States Supreme Court issued two decisions on patents. In Limelight Networks v. Akamai Tech the Court held that direct infringement was required for a finding of inducing infringed. In Nautilus v. BioSig the Court considered patent claim indefiniteness.
APIs and Sheep
On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued several decisions on intellectual property, including Oracle America, Inc. v. Google Inc. on copyright in APIs and In RE Roslin Institute on the patentability of Dolly the Sheep.
US Fee Shifting
Earlier today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two rulings on attorney fees in patent litigation and fee shifting. In Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. the court rejected earlier decisions on the ‘exceptional circumstances’ needed to award fees and wrote than exceptional case is “simply one that stands out from others”. Continue reading US Fee Shifting
Smartphone “Posner Appeal”
The U.S. Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit released its decision in Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., the appeal from Judge Posner’s decision on smartphone patent litigation between the two companies. Judge Posner had denied both infringement actions on the basis that neither side could prove damages. In an opinion for the court, along with two opinions dissenting-in-part, the CAFC reversed-in-part, but affirmed, among other things, that Motorola was not entitled to an injunction for infringement of a FRAND-committed patent.