Reap What You Sow: Industry-Specific Applications of Data Processing Do Not Survive § 101
AGI SURETRACK LLC v. FARMERS EDGE INC. Before Moore, Mayer, and Lourie. Appeal from the District of Nebraska. Summary: Patents claiming data collection, processing, and transmission using generic computer components...
Access Plus Similarity Starts the Clock for Trade Secret Misappropriation Claims
Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow, Co. Ltd. Before Dyk, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts. Summary: A trade secret misappropriation claim accrues...
No Notice, No Fix: Failure to Satisfy § 256(B) Renders Patent Invalid
Fortress Iron, LP, v. Digger Specialties, INC. Before Lourie, Hughes, Circuit Judges, and Kleeh, Chief District Judge. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. Summary:...
A Cure for Written Description and Enablement Headaches: Prior Art
TEVA PHARMACEUTICALS INTERNATIONAL GMBH v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY Before Prost, Cunningham, and Andrews. Appeal from the United States District Court of the District of Massachusetts. Summary: A functionally defined...
Invisible but Invalidating: Undisclosed Functionality Still Triggers On-Sale Bar
DEFINITIVE HOLDINGS, LLC v. POWERTEQ LLC Before Moore, Dyk, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah. Summary: A third-party sale of a product...
Factual Stipulations May Simplify Discovery, but Also Help Plaintiff Navigate Difficult Issues of Fact and Law
VLSI TECHNOLOGY LLC v. INTEL CORP. Before Moore, Chen, and Kleeh. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: The Federal Circuit reversed summary...
Implant Trade Secrets Are Not Protectable Due to Disclosure in Patents
INTERNATIONAL MEDICAL DEVICES, INC. v. CORNELL Before Dyk, Reyna, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California Summary: The Federal Circuit held under...
No Do-Overs: Voluntary Dismissal Does Not Reset Deadline for Stay
ASCENDIS PHARMA A/S v. BIOMARIN PHARMACEUTICAL INC. Before Lourie, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: A respondent in an...
Standing Still? Only if Injury-In-Fact Is Tied to the Claims at Issue
IRONSOURCE LTD. v. DIGITAL TURBINE, INC. Before Moore, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: An appellant seeking to establish Article III standing based on...
Corresponding Structure for a Means-Plus-Function Limitation Need Only Perform the Claimed Function, Not Other Unclaimed Functions
Richard Gramm, et al. v. Deere & Company Before Lourie, Reyna, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa Summary: Disclosure of an additional function...
Conflict of Interest Does Not Automatically Extinguish Attorney-Client Privilege
THE TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK v. GEN DIGITAL INC.; QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP Before Dyk, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the United...
Software Claims Failed Alice Step One Where Purported Improvements Were Not Claimed
TRUSTEES OF COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY v. GEN DIGITAL INC. Before Dyk, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: Software claims were directed...
How Ignoring Disclosed Structure Can Derail a Means-Plus-Function Case
GENUINE ENABLING TECHNOLOGY LLC v. SONY GROUP CORPORATION Before Dyk, Taranto, and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment...
The Credibility of Experts Is in the Province of the Jury
WILLIS ELECTRIC CO., LTD. v. POLYGROUP LTD. (MACAO COMMERCIAL OFFSHORE) Before Moore, Stark, and Oetken (sitting by designation). Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota....
Wireless TV Is So Main“stream”
GOTV STREAMING, LLC V. NETFLIX, INC. Before Prost, Clevenger, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: A winning claim construction isn’t...
Conceptual Similarity Does Not Go Arm in Arm With Substantial Similarity
RANGE OF MOTION PRODUCTS, LLC v. ARMAID COMPANY INC. Before Moore, Cunningham, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maine. Summary: Functional aspects of...
Result-Oriented Claims and Section 101: Claiming the How
US PATENT NO. 7,679,637 LLC v GOOGLE LLC Before Moore, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington. Summary: Result-oriented claims were...
Doubling Down on Frivolous Claims Results in More Fees
ESCAPEX IP, LLC V. GOOGLE LLC Before Taranto, Stoll, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Additional attorneys’ fees may be...
When ‘Optimal’ Isn’t Objective: The Pitfalls of Indefinite Claims
Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. MediaPointe, Inc. Before Taranto, Stoll, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed a...
No Interlocutory Appeals From State’s Bond Order
MICRON TECHNOLOGY INC. v. LONGHORN IP LLC Before Lourie, Schall, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Idaho. Summary: Immediate appellate review may be...
Expert Testimony Fails to Support Jury’s Infringement Verdict
FINESSE WIRELESS LLC v. AT&T MOBILITY LLC Before Moore, Linn, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: Unclear and internally inconsistent...
