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.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 98

Federal Circuit addresses personal jurisdiction in patent infringement litigation

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 30 2012

Finding that the U.S. Supreme Court “has yet to reach a consensus on the proper articulation of the stream-of-commerce theory” of personal jurisdiction to assess whether a court has jurisdiction over a non-resident defendant in a patent infringement suit, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has applied its own theory, which assesses the pleadings and evidence under “any articulation of the stream-of-commerce theory,” and has determined that a district court in Wyoming properly dismissed two patent infringement lawsuits for lack of jurisdiction

Federal Circuit clarifies permanent injunction standard

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 20 2011

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has clarified that, while a judgment of patent infringement and validity does not constitute a presumption of irreparable harm “as it applies to determining the appropriateness of injunctive relief,” the judgment should not be ignored by the court when weighing the equities involved in deciding whether to impose a permanent injunction

Federal Circuit’s patent infringement ruling conflicts with USPTO re-examination on validity

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 1 2012

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has denied a request for an en banc rehearing by a medical-device patent holder which argued that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) Board of Patent Appeals had effectively nullified a previous Federal Circuit decision on the validity of its patent

Biotech company settles claims that counsel divulged confidential information

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 21 2011

A federal court in California has dismissed with prejudice claims that a biotech company filed against its former counsel alleging that the law firm had provided confidential information about the company's patent applications to another client

Location of outside patent counsel may not subject company to state jurisdiction

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 20 2012

A federal court in Massachusetts has dismissed a suit seeking a declaration of non-infringement filed by a Massachusetts company against a Texasbased company, finding that the defendant lacked sufficient contacts with Massachusetts to allow the court to exercise jurisdiction over it

Federal Circuit affirms dismissal of patent assignor estoppel claims

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 21 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has affirmed the district court's dismissal of claims filed by a patent owner against the co-inventor who

Eighth Circuit says pleadings can be filed under seal, but needs more justification

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 21 2013

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that a federal district court did not abuse its discretion in sealing an antitrust complaint

En banc Federal Circuit issues ruling on appellate jurisdiction over patent infringement issues

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 20 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals en banc has determined that parties may appeal the liability issues in a patent infringement action even if the

Federal Circuit reminds litigants to cross-appeal patent invalidity claim

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 21 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, in the context of patents on improvements to electronic animal collars, has in large part affirmed a lower

SCOTUS unanimously rules GM soybean patent infringed

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 16 2013

The U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the "exhaustion doctrine" does not apply in the context of a patented genetically modified (GM) seed, and