Daikin requested inter partes review of two of Chemours’ patents directed to insulating communication cables by pulling wires through melted polymers flowing at a flow rate.
BOT M8 LLC v. SONY CORPORATION OF AMERICA
Before Dyk, Linn, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California
Summary: The district court’s conclusion that allegations of infringement were not plausible because they tracked the claim language too closely presented an overly burdensome pleading standard.
The European Commission (“EC”) has long sought to improve data privacy for Europeans, even when they interact with global or non-European companies. Laws like the General Data Protection Regulation (or “GDPR”) seek to control how even U.S. companies, for example, use data from European citizens. To comply with the GDPR, U.S. companies doing business in Europe are required to use standard contract clauses, or “SCCs” in their agreements governing use of EU citizens’ data.
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) allows a patent applicant to pay reduced fees if it qualifies as a “small entity.” Many types of filing fees are reduced by 50%. These savings can be important for companies on a tight budget, and can add up where applicants have multiple filings. For example, the savings on filing fees per non-provisional patent application are currently more than 900 USD, and the current savings on the 11.5 year maintenance fee for an issued patent are a whopping 3,850 USD!
MINERVA SURGICAL, INC. V. HOLOGIC, INC., ET AL.
Supreme Court of the United States. Opinion of the Court written by Justice Kagan. Justice Alito filed a dissenting opinion. Justice Barrett filed a dissenting opinion, joined by Justices Thomas and Gorsuch.
Summary: Assignor estoppel applies when and only when the assignor’s invalidity assertions contradict explicit or implicit representations made when assigning the patent.
IN RE: SAMSUNG ELECS., CO., LTD.
Before Lourie, Dyk, and Reyna. On Petitions for Writs of Mandamus to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas.
Summary: Manipulation of venue through pre-litigation actions can lead to transfer of venue.
NATIONAL COLLEGIATE ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION v. ALSTON
Before the United States Supreme Court; Opinion by Justice Gorsuch; Concurring Opinion by Justice Kavanaugh; On writs of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Summary: NCAA’s restrictions on education-related benefits to student-athletes do not pass antitrust scrutiny; the compensation restrictions were properly subjected to a “rule of reason” analysis.
U.S. v. Arthrex, Inc.
Before the United States Supreme Court. Majority opinion by Chief Justice Roberts. On writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Summary: A statute preventing the PTO Director from reviewing IPR decisions caused these decisions to violate the Constitution, but allowing such review by the Director remedied that violation.
While the “right to be forgotten” is part of European law, it is at odds with U.S. precedent. See, e.g., Garcia v. Google, Inc., 786 F.3d 733, 745-46 (9th Cir. 2015). A Georgia law allowing the father of a deceased rape victim to sue a television station for publicizing the victim’s name unconstitutionally violated the First Amendment. Cox Broadcasting Corp. v. Cohn, 420 U.S. 469 (1975). And in 2004, the California Supreme Court cleared corporations of any wrongdoing when publishing any information from official public records. Gates v. Discovery Communications, Inc., 34 Cal. 4th 679, 685 (2004). In the United States, the First Amendment wins.
An apparatus claim reciting a digital camera with conventional components is patent ineligible as directed to the abstract idea of using a digital camera to take two pictures and enhance one picture with the other picture.
