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 713

Patent exhaustion rejected: patented seed purchaser has no right to make copies

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 16 2013

The Supreme Court in Bowman v. Monsanto Co. ruled unanimously that a farmer's replanting of harvested seeds constituted making new infringing

En banc Federal Circuit issues five opinions in CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 15 2013

The long-awaited decision held that method, computer-readable medium and system claims for technology related to "the management of risk relating to

Standards, patents and antitrust: what are the risks?

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • Global
  • -
  • May 9 2013

It is important that members of standard setting organisations (SSOs), owners of standard essential patents (SEPs) and licensees of such patents

A first for FRAND: federal court in Microsoft v. Motorola sets FRAND royalty rates for standard essential patents

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 8 2013

Microsoft v. Motorola developed a framework for courts to assess fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms for standard-essential patents

Western District of Washington sets FRAND royalty rates and range for SEPs

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 2 2013

Last week in Microsoft v. Motorola, the U.S. District Court Western District of Washington became the first U.S. court to set fair, reasonable, and

New claim construction guts nearly $600 million dollar infringement award

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2013

Presenting divergent opinions about whether a patentee has demonstrated a "clear and unambiguous disavowal" of claim scope through prosecution

Obviousness-type double patenting may exist when there is neither common ownership nor common inventorship

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2013

Addressing an obviousness-type double patenting rejection, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a decision by the U.S. Patent and

No discovery permitted in inter partes reexamination proceedings

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2013

Addressing for the first time whether 35 U.S.C. 24 empowered a district court to issue a subpoena in an inter partes reexamination proceeding

No prior conception where contemporaneous disclosures failed to show knowledge of complete and operative method of making invention

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2013

Addressing the issue of conception in an interference proceeding, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S

To correct inventorship of a patent, go to the PTO, not the federal courts

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2013

Faced with the question of whether a federal district court should change the inventors listed on the face of a patent, the Federal Circuit found

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Jurisdiction

Workarea

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