Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 24

A forum-selection clause in a license agreement may not necessarily prevent a litigation from being filed and permitted to proceed in a different court

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
November 27 2012

When two separate actions relating to common subject matter are filed, the so-called first-filed rule gives preference to the forum of the first-filed

Failure to comply with IPR policy of standards setting organization may support antitrust and breach of contract claims

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
July 23 2012

Questions relating to the licensing and enforcement of standards-essential patents have recently received much attention, in the media as well as in the courts

Last month at the Federal Circuit - April 2012

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
April 30 2012

In MySpace, Inc. v. GraphOn Corp., No. 11-1149 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 2, 2012), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s SJ grant of invalidity of the patents-in-suit owned by GraphOn Corp. (“GraphOn”

Habush v. Cannon, 09-CV-18149 (Milwaukee County Cir. Ct. June 8, 2011)

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
September 12 2011

The parties were competing personal-injury lawyers

Accused infringer need not practice steps recited in the preamble of a method claim when the preamble defines the environment in which the claim operates

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
July 26 2011

In Advanced Software Design Corp. v. Fiserv, Inc., Nos. 09-1585, 10-1011 (Fed. Cir. June 2, 2011), the Federal Circuit reversed-in-part and vacated-in-part the district court’s determination of noninfringement, affirmed the district court’s denial of Advanced Software Design Corporation’s (“Advanced Software”) motion to amend the complaint, and dismissed Fiserv, Inc.’s (“Fiserv”) cross-appeal on invalidity

35 U.S.C. 282 requires that an invalidity defense be proved by clear and convincing evidence, but a jury may be instructed to evaluate whether the evidence before it is materially new

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
July 26 2011

In Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. Partnership, No. 10-290 (U.S. June 9, 2011), the Supreme Court held that 35 U.S.C. 282 requires that an invalidity defense be proved by clear and convincing evidence

A summary of the Supreme Court’s Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership decision

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
June 14 2011

On June 9, 2011, the Supreme Court decided, 8-0 (Justice Roberts recused himself), that the Patent Act requires invalidity to be proven by “clear and convincing” evidence

Gray v. Novell, Inc

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
January 31 2011

XOpen opposed Gray's application to register the mark iNUX based on XOpen's prior rights to the mark UNIX

Period between entry of judgment and entry of permanent injunction should be considered when calculating damages

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
December 31 2010

In Finjan, Inc. v. Secure Computing Corporation, Nos. 09-1576, -1594 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 4, 2010), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding of infringement of asserted “system” and “storage medium” claims and reversed the finding of infringement of asserted method claims

Prudential reasons and perceived increases in efficiency cannot empower a federal court to hear a case where no case or controversy exists

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
-
USA
-
June 30 2010

In Dow Jones & Co. v. Ablaise Ltd., 09-1524 (Fed. Cir. May 28, 2010), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s denial of Ablaise Ltd.’s (“Ablaise”) motion to dismiss Dow Jones & Company, Inc.’s (“Dow Jones”) DJ invalidity claim against U.S. Patent No. 6,295,530 (“the ’530 patent”) and affirmed the district court’s grant of SJ that the asserted claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,961,737 (“the ’737 patent”) were invalid as obvious

next >

Search results

A forum-selection clause in a license agreement may not necessarily prevent a litigation from being filed and permitted to proceed in a different court

Failure to comply with IPR policy of standards setting organization may support antitrust and breach of contract claims

Last month at the Federal Circuit - April 2012

Habush v. Cannon, 09-CV-18149 (Milwaukee County Cir. Ct. June 8, 2011)

Accused infringer need not practice steps recited in the preamble of a method claim when the preamble defines the environment in which the claim operates

35 U.S.C. 282 requires that an invalidity defense be proved by clear and convincing evidence, but a jury may be instructed to evaluate whether the evidence before it is materially new

A summary of the Supreme Court’s Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership decision

Gray v. Novell, Inc

Period between entry of judgment and entry of permanent injunction should be considered when calculating damages

Prudential reasons and perceived increases in efficiency cannot empower a federal court to hear a case where no case or controversy exists

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Jurisdiction

Workarea