Tag Archives: Supreme Court

Supreme Court’s Stryker/Halo Decision Makes it Easier for Courts to Award Enhanced Damages In Patent Infringement Cases

The recent Supreme Court decisions in the Stryker and Halo cases just made it easier for courts to award enhanced damages in patent infringement cases, discarding Seagate’s “objective recklessness” test. The Seagate Test In 2007, the Federal Circuit announced a test for enhanced … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, enhanced damages, Federal Circuit, Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Patent Trends to Watch in 2016

2016 is starting off with a bang!  A number of interesting new developments have occurred as we enter into this new year: The Supreme Court will review broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI), courtesy of the petition for cert in Cuozzo The Federal Circuit … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation, Broadest Reasonable Interpretation standard, Federal Circuit, Future of PTAB Trial Practice, inter partes review, Litigation, Post Grant Review, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials, Supreme Court Review of post-grant issues | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

See You at the AIPLA 2014 Spring Meeting!

I am presenting at the AIPLA Spring Meeting on May 15, 2014 in Philadelphia and hope to see you there.  My task is to provide strategies for filing inter partes reviews, covered business method reviews and post-grant reviews.  I hope … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, covered business methods, inter partes review, Patent Reform, Post Grant Review | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Eastern District of Texas Denies SAP’s Motion to Vacate the Judgment in the Versata Patent Infringement Case

SAP recently learned that the Eastern District of Texas denied its motion to set aside or stay a district court judgment in favor of Versata for infringement of its U.S. Pat. 6,553,350 (Versata Software, Inc v. SAP America, Inc., No. 2:07-cv-00153 … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, covered business methods, Federal Circuit, patent-eligible subject matter, PTAB, PTAB Patent Trials, PTO Sued Under the APA, Stay in Federal Circuit, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

SAP’s Cert Petition Denied by Supreme Court in Versata Patent Infringement Suit

In earlier posts, I described the $391 million patent infringement judgment awarded to Versata for SAP’s alleged infringement of US Pat. 6,553,350.  I also detailed SAP’s attempts to avoid the judgment by challenging the ‘350 patent in the first covered business … Continue reading

Posted in America Invents Act, claim challenges, covered business methods, Litigation, patent-eligible subject matter, petitions practice, Post Grant Review, software patents, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

WildTangent Files its Supreme Court Certiorari Petition – Part 1

In September of 2009, Ultramercial, Inc. sued WildTangent, Inc., Hulu and YouTube in the Central District of California for alleged patent infringement of U.S. 7,346,545 (the ‘545 patent).  The ‘545 patent claims trading advertisement viewing for access to content over … Continue reading

Posted in claim challenges, Claim Construction, Federal Circuit, Litigation, patent-eligible subject matter | Tagged , , , , , , | 1 Comment

Lockwood Cert Petition Seeks Clarification of Redress for Alleged “Sham” Reexamination Request

In a Petition for Writ of Certiorari dated April 28, 2011, inventor Lawrence B. Lockwood and his company, PanIP, LLC, requested review of the judgment of the Federal Circuit denying its petition for rehearing and rehearing en banc.  (The underlying order … Continue reading

Posted in ex parte reexamination, Litigation, reexamination generally, Substantial New Question (SNQ), Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Federal Circuit Decision in In re Tanaka

You might recall that we discussed the BPAI decision in In re Yasuhito Tanaka in an earlier post.  On April 15, the Federal Circuit reversed the BPAI decision and remanded the matter for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion.  … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, doctrine of claim differentiation, Ex Parte Prosecution, intervening rights, Litigation, past damages, Reissue, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Microsoft v. i4i – Part III: Changing the Presumption of Validity: Impact on Reexamination Practice

Posted March 14, 2011 The prior post discussed only some of the many options the Supreme Court has in the Microsoft v. i4i case (i4i).  In summary, the presumption of validity of a patent as we currently know it may … Continue reading

Posted in Ex Parte Prosecution, Litigation, reexamination generally, Substantial New Question (SNQ), Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Microsoft v. i4i – Part II: The Supreme Court’s Many Options

Posted March 6, 2011 The previous post included a summary of the facts from the Microsoft petition for certiorari.  The Supreme Court has several options when deciding the outcome of this case.  It can maintain the Federal Circuit’s existing presumption … Continue reading

Posted in Ex Parte Prosecution, Litigation, reexamination generally | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments