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 38

Chuck Yeager’s right of publicity suit will no longer fly in the Ninth Circuit

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 31 2012

Addressing several claims stemming out of an allegedly unauthorized publication of signed memorabilia on a website, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s summary judgment ruling in favor of the defendants with respect to numerous claims, finding Chuck Yeager’s submitted declaration to be a sham

Corresponding structure must be an algorithm, not just a computer

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 28 2008

Addressing the issue of when a “means-plus-function” claim element (in the context of a computer-operated invention) suffers from 35 U.S.C. 112, 2 indefiniteness due to the absence of clearly defined corresponding structure, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s decision on summary judgment, finding all of the claims of the subject patent invalid for indefiniteness

No pre-verdict JMOL motions, no review of jury damage award

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

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a permanent injunction and an award of $240 million in damages against Microsoft for patent infringement in connection with certain versions of MS Word software that offer XML editing functionality

Technology transfer agreements: EU promulgates new antitrust rules

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • European Union
  • -
  • April 30 2014

The licensing of technology is core to the business model of many companies operating in IP-sensitive industries. Its commercial benefits are myriad

Bilski-based rejections of computer-implemented claims continue to be issued by board of appeals

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

In a decision applying the Bilski "machine-or-transformation test" (see IP Update, Vol. 11, No. 11), the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (the Board) continued its practice of invalidating computer implemented method claims under 101

Adding material from an ancestor application to an issued patent during reexamination not allowed

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

Addressing the issue of permissibility of adding a subject matter from its ancestor application back into the issued patent during its reexamination, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the finding of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) that it is impermissible to do so without showing that the subject matter was inherently present in the continuation-in-part application for the patent

Software ownership

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • June 30 2008

In the recent case of Laurence Wrenn v Stephen Landamore 2008 EWCA Civ 496, Mr Wrenn’s appeal was dismissed and Lord Justice Toulson held that he was liable to pay Mr Landamore royalties for his work on developing software for interfaces to enable third party audio equipment to work with car radios of particular manufacturers

English court confirms claims to computer program claims are patentable subject matter

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • United Kingdom
  • -
  • February 29 2008

The English High Court has now handed down a decision which moves the UK position on software claims back into line with that of the European Patent Office (EPO) and other mainland European Agencies

Factual expert declaration is vital to avoid summary judgment

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

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit confirmed a special master’s determination that, in the context of a means plus function claim element, the patentee’s technical expert failed to tie the accused device to the corresponding structures found in the patent specification

The legend of the golden master lives on Supreme Court limits the reach of 271 (f)

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • May 30 2007

Continuing a string of reversals of Federal Circuit decisions, the U.S. Supreme Court once again reversed the Federal Circuit in holding that under 35 U.S.C. 271 (f) software per se does not qualify as a “component” and that software copies created outside the United States from a master disk exported from the United States are “supplied” from the United States