Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-10 of 27
Sanctions may be awarded for violation of injunction, even absent infringement
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- April 21 2011
On April 20, 2011, the Federal Circuit unanimously revised the two-step test set forth in KMS Fastening Systems for determining when a contempt order is appropriate for an alleged violation of an injunction by a modified product
Bilski v. Kapposback where we started?
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- June 29 2010
The Supreme Court of the United States issued a decision in In re Bilski affirming the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's decision that Bilski's claims were not eligible for patenting under 101, but reversing the Federal Circuit's ruling that "machine or transformation" was the sole test for patent eligibility
In re Bilski: business method patents trudge on
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- June 28 2010
On the last day of its October 2009 term, more than seven months after oral argument, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its decision in In re Bilski
In response to Agilent Technologies, USPTO cancels its rule
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- May 31 2010
In a Federal Register notice (75 FR 19558) dated April 15, 2010, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) cancelled its Rule 41.200(b)the rule that, in the context of interference proceedings, required the USPTO to give claims their “broadest reasonable construction in light of the specification of the patent or application in which it appears.”
When is a design around a mere “colorable variation”? An injunction order ambiguous? (Stay tuned)
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- May 31 2010
Heralding a busy en banc season for Judge Rader’s first year as chief judge, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued its second en banc order in less than a month, this time vacating its panel decision in TiVo v. EchoStar, and taking up Judge Rader’s dissent on the issue of when a contempt holding, as applied to a design-around by an enjoined party, is appropriate
Reissued i4i panel opinion clarifies willfulness analysis
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- April 28 2010
In a re-issuance of an earlier opinion, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit clarified the willfulness analysis of its earlier decision that affirmed a jury’s $200 million award against Microsoft in a patent infringement action
En banc reconsideration of inequitable conduct decision announced
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- April 28 2010
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit announced it would reconsider, en banc, its January 2010 decision on inequitable conduct in Therasense v. Becton Dickinson and vacated the earlier panel decision
Section 112 includes a separate written description requirement
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- April 28 2010
Sitting en banc, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a 9-2 decision, confirmed that 35 U.S.C. 112, 1 includes a written description requirement separate from the enablement requirement
Registration requirement does not restrict a subject-matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- March 31 2010
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court of the United States held that although the Copyright Act’s registration requirement, 17 U.S.C. 411(a), is a precondition to filing a copyright infringement claim, a copyright holder’s failure to comply with that requirement does not restrict a federal court’s subject-matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works
Supreme Court holds that Copyright Act does not restrict a federal court’s subject-matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works
- McDermott Will & Emery
- -
- USA
- -
- March 4 2010
On March 2, 2010, the Supreme Court issued a decision holding that the Copyright Act's requirement that copyright owners must register their works before suing for copyright infringement is not jurisdictional, such that federal district courts have subject-matter jurisdiction over infringement claims involving unregistered works
Current Search
- Workarea - Intellectual Property
- Workarea - Litigation
- Author - Paul Devinsky
Suggested Facets
Author
- Adam D. Brooke (1)
- Alexander Ott (1)
- Eric M. Shelton (2)
- Jeremiah Armstrong (3)
- Justin Hill, Ph.D. (1)
- Matthew Ell (1)
- Michael F. Hurley (1)
- Nathaniel McQueen (2)
- Rita Weeks (2)