Close

Patent Lawyer Blog

Updated:

Defendant’s Argument That It Practiced the Prior Art Not Sufficient to Avoid Finding of Infringement on Summary Judgment

Plaintiff Gen-Probe Incorporated (“Gen-Probe”) filed a patent infringement action against Becton Dickinson & Company (“Becton Dickinson”) alleging infringement of its Automation and Cap patents. The Automation patents resulted from Gen-Probe’s development of a single automated instrument to detect a target nucleic acid indicative of the presence of a target pathogen…

Updated:

Apple v. Samsung: Court Dissolves Injunction and Permits Sale of Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1

Earlier this summer, the district court enjoined Samsung from “making, using, offering to sell, or selling within the United States, or importing into the United States, Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 tablet computer, and any product that is no more than colorably different from this specified product and embodies any design…

Updated:

Chief Judge Kozinski Rules in Favor of Google Finding Street View Did not Infringe Vederi’s Patents

Vederi owns several patents which cover certain methods for enabling users to navigate a geographic area visually from a device, including a personal computer. Vederi asserted that Google’s Street View service, which allows users to explore geographic location by viewing street-level imagery, infringed its patents. Both parties cross moved for…

Updated:

Apple v. Samsung: The Federal Circuit Frees the Galaxy Nexus from Siri’s Injunctive Grip

In June 2012, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined Samsung’s Galaxy Nexus smartphone because it likely infringed Apple’s 8,086,604 patent (the “‘604 patent”) and because Apple was likely to suffer irreparable harm in the absence of an injunction. Apple prevailed at the district court…

Updated:

Covenant Not to Sue Blocks Declaratory Judgment Action Seeking to Invalidate Patent

The plaintiff, Mytee Products, Inc. (“Mytee”) manufactures and sells a sealing fan under the name Tradewind. Defendants Studebaker Enterprises, Inc. (“Studebaker”) and Dri-Eaz Products, Inc. (“Dri-Eaz”) were assigned ownership rights in the patents-in-suit, which are both entitled “Shrouded Floor Drying Fan.” Another of the defendants, Skagit Northwest Holdings, Inc. (“Skagit”)…

Updated:

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd – Apple’s landslide victory over Samsung in a US District Court does not mark the end of the so called smart phone ‘patent wars’

This article was first published in Vol. 12, Issue 4 of E-Commerce Law Reports and is reprinted with permission. As the smart phone wars continue to rage across the world, the verdict in the Apple v. Samsung case is the latest battle to end, at least for now, in favor…

Updated:

Freddie Mac Proves Patent Invalid on Motion to Dismiss That Is Converted into a Summary Judgment Motion for Claiming Unpatentable Subject Matter

Graff/Ross Holdings LLP (“Graff/Ross”) filed a patent infringement action against the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”) for patent infringement. Freddie Mac moved to dismiss pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6) on the ground that the patent was invalid for claiming unpatentable subject matter. The district court referred the motion to…

Updated:

Administrative Law Judge Denies Request to Exclude Rebuttal Witness and States That the Request Did Not Merit a Motion that Expends the Resources of the ITC and the Parties

Complainant Knowles Electronics, LLC (“Knowles”) initiated an investigation with the ITC against Analog Devices, Inc. Amkor Technology, Inc. and Avnet, Inc. (collectively, the Respondents) over silicon microphone packages. During the proceeding, Knowles submitted a rebuttal witness statement from Mr. Phillip Green. The Respondents moved to exclude the rebuttal statement alleging…

Updated:

AT&T, Apple and Other Defendants Win Motion to Dismiss Claims of Indirect Infringement Even Though Claims Satisfied Form 18

Garnet Digital sued AT&T, Apple and several other defendants for patent infringement and included a claim for indirect infringement. Garnet Digital accused all of the defendants of infringing U.S. Patent No. 5,379,421, which is entitled “Interactive Terminal for the Access of Remote Database Information.” Garnet Digital made the same allegation…

Updated:

Promega Wins $50 Million Jury Verdict — and the Court Takes It Away Because Promega Did Not Show That Infringing Products Were Made or Sold in the United States or Imported into the United States

Plaintiff Promega Corporation (“Promega”) filed an action against Life Technologies Corporation, Applied Biosystems, LLC and Invitrogen IP Holdings, Inc. for infringing and inducing infringement of five patents pertaining to copying of sequences of a DNA strand. In a previous licensing agreement, Life Technologies and Applied Biosystems were permitted to sell…

Contact Us