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

Invalidating a patent on a motion to dismiss is proper

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

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit did not find the patentee’s infringement suit to be objectively baseless, notwithstanding that the

Inherency is tough to proveeven in IPR

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

In four final written decisions in Inter Partes Review (IPR) challenges, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concluded that the petitioner had

First patents survive inter partes review fully intact

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 29 2014

In the past several months, decisions have been rendered in the first wave of inter partes reviews filed under the American Invents Act (AIA). The

On a plain and ordinary meaning of “embedded” code in a web page

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 30 2014

Addressing a district court’s construction of the claim term “embedded” code as code “written into the HTML code of the web page” and the related

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

New complaint filed by Furuno names Honeywell and Skyforce as proposed respondents

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 4 2011

The ITC received a new complaint on September 30, 2011 filed on behalf of Furuno Electric Co. Ltd. and Furuno USA Inc

Federal Circuit affirms jury verdict of invalidity based on on-sale bar and public use

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 28 2012

Affirming the district court’s judgment, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit cleared Facebook of allegations of patent infringement, finding that that the patent in suit was invalid under 35 U.S.C. 102(b) because the patentee’s product which embodied the patented subject matter was on sale and in public use more than one year before the filing of the patent

Supreme Court affirms clear and convincing standard of patent invalidity proof

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 30 2011

Delivering what is likely the final blow to its battle against a $240 million infringement judgment, the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously rejected Microsoft’s plea to modify the clear and convincing evidence standard of proof required to invalidate a patent

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