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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 173

Pre-Issuance Damages Possible Only If You “Know” About the Published Application
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • March 30 2016

Addressing for the first time the notice requirement for pre-issuance damages under 35 USC 154(d), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit


Supreme Court on evaluation of claims to computer-implemented inventions under 35 U.S.C. 101
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 30 2014

The Supreme Court of the United States has now confirmed that while computer-implemented inventions, such as computer software, remain eligible


Limits on the use of the disclosure-dedication rule under doctrine of equivalents
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • November 29 2012

Addressing for the first time the issue of whether the disclosure of subject matter in a document incorporated by reference amounts to a dedication of that subject matter to the public under the Johnson & Johnston disclosure-dedication rule, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s summary judgment of non-infringement, holding that the host patent must first sufficiently inform one of ordinary skill that the incorporated document contains subject matter that is an alternative to a claim limitation before the dedication rule can be used to limit equivalents


Section 101: Protecting Software & Other Technologies
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • March 23 2017

Section 101 of the patent statute provides a fundamental threshold for the types of inventions that can be patented. In this episode, McDermott IP


Mixed Results: Federal Circuit’s Intervening 101 Determination Faces PTAB Dissent
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • March 27 2017

After the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the very same issue and patent, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reached a


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


Data-encryption is patent eligible despite not being tied to a particular machine
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • March 31 2014

Addressing an argument that a data-encryption patent was directed to non-eligible subject matter because it covered an abstract idea divorced from a


Federal Circuit clarifies entire market value rule, hypothetical negotiation date and use of settlement agreements
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 6 2012

In LaserDynamics v. Quanta Computer, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned an $8.5 million lump sum jury award and remanded the case for a new trial on damages


Adding Pre-Existing Technology Won’t Save a Patent-Ineligible Claim
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 3 2017

In the recent FairWarning and Synopsys cases (IP Update, Vol. 19, No. 11), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found the challenged


Insurance form processing qualifies as a “financial service or product” for CBM review
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 30 2015

In a series of decisions addressing whether an abstract idea involves “financial product or service” in the context of Covered Business Method (CBM