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: 1-10 of 300

Retractable Technologies, Inc. v. Becton Dickinson & Co., 2013-1567 (July 7, 2013)

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 23 2014

Where some, but not all, findings of infringement are reversed but no remand is sought, and a general damage award is consistent with the mandate

Align Technology, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, 2013-1240, -1363 (July 18, 2014)

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 23 2014

International Trade Commission must follow its own regulations, which provide that only an "Initial Determination," not an "Order," is subject to

Raymond E. Stauffer v. Brooks brothers Group, Inc., No. 2013-1180 (Fed. Cir. July 10, 2014)

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 23 2014

The changes to the false marking statute under the America Invents Act are retroactive; any existing or future plaintiff must be a party that has

Supreme Court extends Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. to computer patents

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 23 2014

The Supreme Court held that patent claims that are directed towards abstract ideas will not be patentable under 35 U.S.C. 101 unless the claim

U.S. Supreme Court issues two unanimous decisions heightening the requirements for patent definiteness and induced patent infringement

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 4 2014

In two unanimous decisions issued on Monday, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit's prevailing tests for determining when a patent is

Gilead Sciences, Inc., et al. v. Natco Pharma Limited & Natco Pharma, Inc., No. 2013-1418 (Fed. Cir. April 22, 2014).

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2014

Patents issuing after, but expiring before, another patent may serve as a double-patenting reference for the later-expiring patent. The patentee

Braintree Labs., Inc. v. Novel Labs., Inc., No. 2013-1438 (Fed. Cir. April 22, 2014).

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 30 2014

The goals of the specification may not be claim requirements; further, claims are construed according to the patent's own lexicography and, where

In re Toyota Motor Corp., 2014-113 (Fed. Cir. April 1, 2014).

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 16 2014

Writ of mandamus directing the district court to grant transfer motion issued where district court found no factor favoring retention of claims. The

Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Actavis, Inc., Nos. 2013-1658, 1662 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 31, 2014).

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 9 2014

A license that expressly covers only particular patents may impliedly cover only continuations of those patents. A patentee brought an action for

MRC Innovations, Inc. v. Hunter Mfg., LLP, No. 2013-1433 (Fed. Cir. April 2, 2014).

  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 9 2014

The Federal Circuit affirmed, finding that both patents (one for football jerseys and one for baseball jerseys) were invalid as obvious. The patentee