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: 11-20 of 98

WiFi "sniffing" ruled not a violation of the Wiretap Act where patent holder sought to collect information that was available over public WiFi networks

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 7 2012

Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC ("Innovatio") filed patent infringement actions against various hotels, coffee shops, restaurants and supermarkets for the use of wireless Internet technology located throughout the United States

Nothing non-obvious about applying pre-existing technology to the Internet

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 28 2013

Addressing the issue of obviousness of patents directed to Internet-based software, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a

Function Media, LLC v. Google Inc., No. 2012-1020 (Fed. Cir. Feb 13, 2013)

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • February 28 2013

Special purpose computer-implemented means-plus-function limitations require the specification to disclose the algorithm for performing the function

Apple v. Samsung Electronics: the perils of email auto deletion

  • Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 27 2012

Apple recently received an e-discovery victory in their global patent battle with Samsung Electronics

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

Insurance coverage for e-commerce website-related patent litigation

  • Haynes and Boone LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 8 2010

Carmaker Hyundai recently engineered insurance coverage for a patent infringement defense of its website

ESPN loses affirmative defenses and invalidity counterclaim on motion to dismiss but court recognizes unfairness in allowing "bare-bones" infringement complaint while prohibiting defendants from pleading affirmative defenses with brevity

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 19 2012

PageMelding filed a patent infringement action against ESPN asserting a patent that enables internet service and content providers to form mutually beneficial collaborations where website content is customized in accordance with those collaborations

Supreme Court limits patent infringement liability in closely watched Internet software case

  • Arent Fox LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 5 2014

On June 2, 2014, in the decision of Limelight Networks Inc., v. Akamai Technologies, Inc., the US Supreme Court made it more difficult for patentees

Court grants stay pending IPR to non-petitioner, conditioned on agreement to estoppel

  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 24 2014

In a further development in an area where numerous district court judges have issued divergent opinions, a court in the Northern District of

Federal Circuit affirms invalidity under section 101 of patent claims directed to guaranteeing performance of online transactions

  • Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 3 2014

A claim that merely requires generic computer implementation of an abstract idea is not subject matter eligible under section 101. At issue were