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 107

PTAB grants request for rehearing relating to procedure for serving petitions

  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 1 2014

In an order granting a request for rehearing to address the issue of a filing date of a petition for Inter Partes Review (IPR), the U.S. Patent and

With "one click", business methods are patentable in Canada

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • October 15 2010

In a decision of the Federal Court of Canada released on October 14, 2010, Amazon.com, Inc. v. Attorney General of Canada, the Court allowed an appeal from a ruling by the Commissioner of Patents ("Commissioner") that had originally denied a patent application by Amazon.com Inc. ("Amazon") for its pervasively successful one click online ordering technology

Federal Court of Appeal rules on Amazon.com’s "one-click" patent business methods remain patentable in Canada

  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • November 28 2011

On November 24, 2011, the Federal Court of Appeal released its decision in Canada (AG) v. Amazon.com, Inc., directing that the Commissioner of Patents resume the examination of Amazon.com’s patent application in accordance with the Court’s reasons

Summary judgment on indefiniteness denied where claims reciting term of "engine for" was not a means-plus-function term

  • Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 6 2011

Defendant contended that several claims of a patent were indefinite under 35 U.S.C. 112, 2

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

CAFC rules on issues of claim construction, infringement, evidence, and reasonably royalty determination

  • Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • September 16 2014

The CAFC affirmed the district court’s construction of “domain name” as “a name corresponding to an IP address,” rejecting Appellant’s argument that

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

$368 million damages award vacated

  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • October 27 2014

In VIRNETX, Inc. V. Cisco SYSTEMS, Inc., Appeal No. 2013-1489, the Federal Circuit vacated a damages award for use of an improper royalty base

Current issues in lifesciences

  • CMS Cameron McKenna
  • -
  • Czech Republic, European Union
  • -
  • January 11 2012

The lifescience sector is driven by development and innovation

Amazon.com’s one-click patent application allowed in Canada

  • Blake Cassels & Graydon LLP
  • -
  • Canada
  • -
  • January 4 2012

Following the Federal Court of Appeal decision reported in our November 2011 Blakes Bulletin, in which the Amazon.com application was remanded to the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) for further consideration, we have now heard that the application has been allowed and a patent will issue with method and apparatus claims