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 58

What constitutes a covered business method patent?

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 29 2015

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) provided guidance as to what constitutes a patent subject to

Data-encryption is patent eligible despite not being tied to a particular machine

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 31 2014

Addressing an argument that a data-encryption patent was directed to non-eligible subject matter because it covered an abstract idea divorced from a

Federal Circuit issues opinion in Pass & Seymour v. ITC

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 30 2010

On August 27, 2010 the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the holding of the International Trade Commission in Inv. No. 337-TA-615, that certain accused products produced by Respondents General Protecht Group, Wenzhou Trimone Science and Technology Electric Co. Ltd. and Shanghai ELE Manufacturing Corporation do not infringe the asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 5,594,398 and 7,212,386, held by Complainant Pass & Seymour, Inc

First application of Alice Corp. decision to covered business method patent review

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 8 2014

In determining whether a Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review should be instituted, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) referred to the

Data transaction claim not patent eligible

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 31 2014

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a ruling designated as non-precedential, affirmed the district court finding that a claimed

Commission finds no violation, terminates investigation 337-TA-670

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2010

The Commission has found no violation of Section 337 in Inv. No. 337-TA-670, Certain Adjustable Keyboard Support Systems and Components Thereof, and terminated the investigation

New investigation 337-TA-726 instituted, assigned to Chief ALJ Luckern

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 11 2010

On July 8, 2010, the Commission issued a notice instituting a section 337 investigation entitled Certain Electronic Imaging Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-726, based on a complaint filed June 16, 2010

Commission declines review of ID, terminates Inv. No. 698 for three respondents

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 13 2010

On July 12, the Commission declined review of an initial determination dated June 22, 2010 by Chief ALJ Luckern, terminating the investigation as to three respondents based on a settlement agreement, in Inv. No. 337-TA-698, Certain DC-DC Controllers and Products Containing Same

ALJ Gildea issues initial determination granting partial termination of electronic device investigation

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 21 2010

ALJ Gildea issued an initial determination today granting an unopposed motion by complainant for partial termination of Inv. No. 337-TA-701, Certain Electronic Devices, Including Mobile Phones, Portable Music Players, and Computers, by withdrawing U.S. Patent No. 6,262,735 from the investigation

Infringement of a computerized method must demonstrate use of a computer

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 7 2010

In a decision that issued shortly before the Supreme Court decision in In re Bilski, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent directed to “computerized method” was not infringed where at least one step was not performed by a computer