By Rachael Peters Pugel and David G. Barker The Federal Circuit has reversed, for the second time, the much-followed copyright infringement case, Oracle America, Inc. v. Google LLC, which has been ongoing since 2010. Oracle filed suit alleging Google copied and used 37 packages of Oracle’s Java application programming interface (“API”), as well as the […]
By Robert A. Clarke and David G. Barker The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to consider whether damages for infringement of a U.S. patent include lost profits resulting from activities outside the U.S. In WesternGeco L.L.C., v. Ion Geophysical Corporation, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict that Ion infringed WesternGeco’s patent for a device […]
By Tyler J. Fortner and David G. Barker Last Friday, in In re Brunetti, the Federal Circuit held that the ban on “scandalous and immoral” trademarks under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(a) is unconstitutional. The decision follows the June 19, 2017, Supreme Court decision, Matal v. Tam (discussed here), which held that the clause prohibiting marks […]
By Peter R. Montecuollo and David G. Barker The Federal Circuit issued guidance yesterday for district courts deciding venue challenges after the Supreme Court’s May 2017 decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC. In In re Micron Technology, Inc., the Federal Circuit granted Micron Technology, Inc.’s petition for a writ of […]
By Rachael Peters Pugel and Andrew F. Halaby The Supreme Court has granted a writ of certiorari challenging the constitutionality of inter partes review proceedings conducted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office under the America Invents Act. The Court’s ruling in this matter, especially if it holds inter partes reviews to be unconstitutional, […]
By Jacob C. Jones and David G. Barker On June 12, 2017, in Sandoz Inc. v. Amgen Inc., the United States Supreme Court unanimously held that a drug manufacturer may give a required 180-day notice of its intent to market a biosimilar drug before receiving FDA approval. This means that, in some circumstances, manufacturers can […]
The United States Supreme Court today held in Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark International, Inc. that the doctrine of patent exhaustion limits post-sale restrictions by patent owners and that patent rights are exhausted once a product is sold domestically or internationally. Partially continuing the recent theme of unanimous intellectual property decisions (see here and here), […]
Under the America Invents Act (AIA), 35 U.S.C. § 102(a) bars the patentability of an “invention [that] was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.” The AIA added “otherwise available to the public” to the […]
The United States Supreme Court announced today that laches, an affirmative defense based on an injured party’s delay in bringing suit, may not bar patent infringement damages within the six-year period under § 286 of the Patent Act. The Court’s decision in SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC reversed the Federal Circuit’s […]
Today, in Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., the Supreme Court held that a single component of a patented invention, even if “important,” does not trigger liability for infringement under Section 271(f)(1) of the Patent Act. Section 271(f)(1) provides: Whoever without authority supplies or causes to be supplied in or from the United States all […]
