Search results
Order by most recent / most popular / relevance
Results: 1-10 of 14
Oral argument in CLS Bank: redefining patent eligibility for computer-related inventions?
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- February 11 2013
On February 8, 2013, the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, heard oral arguments in CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd., No
EU moves closer to a unitary patent regime for obtaining and litigating patents in Europe
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- European Union
- -
- December 12 2012
On December 11, 2012, the European Parliament approved a set of three proposals to create (1) a “unitary” patent valid across 25 EU member states, (2) a simplified language regime for EU patents, and (3) a unified patent court for hearing infringement disputes
Supreme Court holds that new evidence and de novo review apply in Section 145 action
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 18 2012
A patent applicant who is denied a patent after appealing to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Board of Appeals and Interferences has the option of either appealing directly to the Federal Circuit or proceeding with a challenge in district court under 35 USC 145 (145 Civil Action
Federal Circuit declines to establish a “settlement negotiation privilege”
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 10 2012
On April 9, 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit gave alleged patent infringers a potentially powerful new discovery tool to help establish what is, or is not, a reasonable royalty based on prior patent licenses
Supreme Court tells Federal Circuit to reconsider patent eligibility of isolated DNA claims
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 26 2012
On the heels of its unanimous decision holding that the personalized medicine method claims at issue in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., No. 10-1150 (S. Ct. 2012), cannot be patented under 35 USC 101 because they effectively claim a law of nature, the Supreme Court has asked the Federal Circuit to reconsider its decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. No. 10-1406 (Fed. Cir. 2011) (also known as the “ACLU gene patent” case
Unanimous Supreme Court invalidates Prometheus personalized medicine claims
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 20 2012
On March 20, 2012, in Mayo Collaborative Services et al. v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., No. 10-1150 (S. Ct. 2012), the Supreme Court held that claims directed to methods of optimizing the dose of specific drugs used in the treatment of specific conditions are invalid under 35 U.S.C. 101 because they impermissibly claim laws of nature
Only new or amended claims, not arguments, can trigger intervening rights in patent reexamination, says en banc Federal Circuit
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- March 16 2012
On March 15, 2012, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc decision in Marine Polymer Technologies, Inc. v. HemCon, Inc., upholding the district court’s $29 million verdict in favor of the patent owner, Marine Polymer, and denying defendant HemCon’s intervening rights defense where Marine Polymer had never formally amended the asserted patent claims during reexamination
Supreme Court unanimously reaffirms clear and convincing evidence standard for patent invalidity
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- June 9 2011
In its decision in Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Limited Partnership, No. 10-290 (June 9, 2011), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously affirmed the Federal Circuit's long-established precedent that in all patent infringement cases, an accused infringer must prove patent invalidity by clear and convincing evidence
The Federal Circuit orders en banc consideration of joint infringement liability
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 21 2011
On April 20, 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit agreed to address the question of whether and under what circumstances there can be joint liability for patent infringement
The Supreme Court Argument in Microsoft v. i4i: Will the court lower the burden for proving patent invalidity in infringement litigation?
- Foley & Lardner LLP
- -
- USA
- -
- April 18 2011
For nearly three decades, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has required litigants defending a claim of patent infringement to prove invalidity by clear and convincing evidence
Current Search
- Workarea - Litigation
- Workarea - Patents
- Firm Name - Foley & Lardner LLP
- Author - Jeanne M. Gills
Suggested Facets
Author
- Andrew S. Baluch (2)
- Courtenay C. Brinckerhoff (5)
- Cynthia Franecki (1)
- George C. Best (1)
- Jacqueline D. Wright Bonilla (1)
- Justin E. Gray (1)
- Mary M. Calkins (2)
- Stephen B. Maebius (5)
- Steven J. Rizzi (2)