We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo






  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 97

1447(d) notwithstanding, certain district court remand orders to state courts are appealable

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 8 2009

In Carlsbad Technology Inc. v. HIF Bio, Inc., the Supreme Court ruled that district court orders remanding cases back to state courts are subject to appeal

USPTO releases post-Bilski Section 101 examination guidelines

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 24 2009

Public comments on USPTO’s post-Bilski, patentable subject matter guidelines are due September 28, 2009

KSR based renewed motion on obviousness is a winner

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 26 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court grant of a post-KSR renewed summary judgment on obviousness (after denying a pre-KSR motion

The flange may be rectangularbut it needn’t have four rims

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a determination by the International Trade Commission (ITC), resulting in a judgment of a 337 violation against the respondentintervenors, SMC Corporation and SMC of America (collectively SMC

Context-dependent claim construction creates an improper use limitation

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court claim construction finding the meaning of a claim term to be context-specific

Unfixed design not ripe for DJ

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed a district court dismissal of a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction when the declaratory judgment plaintiff did not have a substantially fixed and definite product design when it filed the action

Claim meaning may depend on why you are looking

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2009

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, invoking the 112, 2 written description requirement, held that a party copying claims to provoke an interference must have written description support in its own specification to support the claims in issue

Scope of patent invalidity assertion agreement does not broaden upon merger

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2009

Addressing the impact on an acquiring company of an acquired company’s agreement not to challenge a third party’s patent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed in part an International Trade Commission (ITC) finding that Epistar Corporation (Epistar) infringed Philips Lumileds Lighting Company (Lumileds) patent

Tafas v. Doll: patent rules given new life by Federal Circuit

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 23 2009

The Federal Circuit largely reversed a district court ruling and found that the USPTO did not exceed the scope of its rulemaking authority

Lawmakers renew battle over patent reform in 2009

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 31 2009

After unsuccessful efforts to enact significant patent reform legislation in the last session of Congress, legislators renewed their patent reform efforts on March 3, 2009 by introducing the Patent Reform Act of 2009 in both the House and Senate

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy