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 1,231

Reasonable Royalty Rates for Standard-Essential Patents Must Account for Value Added by Standardization, Even If Not Subject to RAND Obligations
  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • USA
  • January 28 2016

In Commonwealth Scientific and Indus. Research Org. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1066, the Federal Circuit vacated a district court damages


Claims are construed in computer technology case
  • Morris James LLP
  • USA
  • January 15 2016

Stark, C.J. Claim construction opinion issues regarding nineteen terms from seven patents. A Markman hearing took place on November 17, 2015 The


Final Written Decision Finding Challenged Claims Eligible for CBM Review and Unpatentable Under Section 101 CBM2014-00156
  • Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
  • USA
  • January 8 2016

In its Final Written Decision, the Board determined that claims 1-4 of the ‘100 patent were unpatentable for claiming ineligible subject matter under


Seller May Be Sued Outside Its Home State for Infringing Online Sales Through Amazon.com
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • December 22 2015

A Massachusetts court found that it had jurisdiction to hear a patent and trademark infringement suit filed against a seller located.in Washington


ITC Lacks Jurisdiction over Internet Transmissions into United States
  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • USA
  • December 21 2015

In ClearCorrect Operating, LLC v. International Trade Commission, Appeal No. 2014-1527, the Federal Circuit held that the ITC could not block the


Unambiguous Plain Meaning of Claim Limitations Trumps Other Descriptions in Specification
  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • USA
  • December 21 2015

In Straight Path IP Group, Inc. v. Sipnet EU S.R.O., Appeal No. 2015-1212, the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB's construction of a claim term in an


Amazon Not Liable for Patent Infringement When Other Companies Sell Infringing Products on Amazon's Website
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • December 17 2015

A Washington court recently held that Amazon was not liable for patent infringement when other companies sold infringing goods on Amazon's website


Media Content Transportation Patent Survives Alice Challenge
  • Seyfarth Shaw LLP
  • USA
  • December 15 2015

Hulu, LLC; Netflix, Inc.; Spotify USA Inc.; and Vimeo, LLC petitioned for Covered Business Method review of U.S. Patent No. 7,269,854 ("the '854


PTAB to Shakespeare: “ ‘What’s in a Name?’ Are you Kidding? Everything!”
  • Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
  • USA
  • December 9 2015

Shakespeare's Juliet famously observes, "What's in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." The PTAB begs to differ


Federal Circuit reverses ITC, holds that electronic transmissions of Digital Data are not "articles" subject to ITC jurisdiction under Section 337
  • Dentons
  • USA
  • November 13 2015

Electronic transmissions of digital data from foreign entities are not "articles" under Section 337 (19 U.S.C. 1337) or subject to ITC