Close

Patent Lawyer Blog

Updated:

Google CEO Ordered to Testify in Patent Dispute with Oracle

In the ongoing patent battle between Google and Oracle over aspects of the Android operating system, Oracle filed a motion seeking to take four additional depositions, including Google CEO, Larry Page. Each of these depositions would be over the ten deposition limit established by Fed.R.Civ.P. 30. Google opposed the request…

Updated:

Delaware District Court Grants Motion to Transfer Even Though Transferee Court Did Not Have Personal Jurisdiction over the Plaintiff

Plaintiff brought suit in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware against defendants asserting declaratory judgment, antitrust, Lanham Act and state tort claims based on two patents co-owned by the defendants. The defendants moved to transfer the case to the United States District Court for the Central…

Updated:

Delaware District Court Stays Patent Lawsuit Pending Reexamination in the Patent and Trademark Office

In a recent case in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, the district court stayed a patent infringement case pending reexamination of the patent in the Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”). Defendant filed a motion to stay the case in light of an inter partes reexamination…

Updated:

Transfer Motion Denied Where Defendants Did Not Show That Case Could Have Been Filed in Proposed Transferee Jurisdiction

Defendants moved to transfer a multi-defendant patent infringement case from the Eastern District of Texas to the Eastern District of Michigan. The defendants asserted that transfer was appropriate under 28 U.S.C. §1404(a) due to factors of convenience. The plaintiff opposed the motion on the ground that the defendants had not…

Updated:

Dismissal of Indirect and Joint Infringement Appropriate Where Plaintiff Failed to Plead Sufficient Facts to Establish Knowledge and Control or Direction

Plaintiff filed a patent infringement suit against 17 defendants alleging direct, indirect and joint infringement. The defendants moved to dismiss for failure to state a claim. The district court granted the motions to dismiss the joint infringement and indirect infringement claims, but denied the motions to dismiss the direct infringement…

Updated:

Trial By Ambush Not Tolerated In Texas

A Texas Court recently granted a plaintiff’s motion to strike the defendant’s non-infringement theory based on the defendant’s failure to previously disclose it. At trial, the defendant attempted to elicit testimony from the plaintiff’s expert witness that the accused website did not infringe, in light of the way it operated.…

Updated:

Motion to Dismiss Denied Under Bilski Where Plaintiff Contended That a Computer Programmed in a Particular Way Was the Invention Itself

Plaintiff’s complaint alleged a single count for patent infringement, which asserted that the defendant infringes its patent through the use of an online dating website. The particular feature accused is called “QuickMatch,” which notifies two users who demonstrate mutual interest in each other. The patent is directed to a computerized…

Updated:

Damage Experts’ Opinions Excluded Where Experts Did Not Establish Link Between License and the Patent-In-Suit

In a recent decision from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, the court granted in pat and denied in part plaintiff’s motion to exclude the expert testimony of defendants’ damage experts. Plaintiff argued that the opinions of defendants’ experts were unreliable and used flawed methodologies…

Updated:

First-Filed Declaratory Judgment Action Dismissed in California Where Florida Court Was Already Familiar with Patents-in-Suit

Plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment action in California seeking to invalidate defendant’s patents and for a declaration that it did not infringe the patents. The defendant responded by filing a patent infringement lawsuit in Florida in the same court where it had previously filed and litigated a patent infringement matter…

Updated:

Review Your Assignment Agreements Now — United States Supreme Court Re-Affirms that Inventors Own Their Inventions

In a much anticipated decision, the United States Supreme Court confirmed that, absent a valid assignment agreement, inventors own their invention — even if federal funding was used to support the research efforts. The decision in Leland Stanford Junior Univeristy v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. held that under the Patent…

Contact Us