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 1,425

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Apple-Samsung Patent Case
  • Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP
  • USA
  • October 14 2016

During oral arguments on Tuesday, justices of the U.S. Supreme Court grappled with the appropriate standard by which to assess damages for

Streaming Under 101: No Affinity for Patent Against Music Store App
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • October 6 2016

In Affinity Labs of Texas, LLC v. Amazon.com, Inc. et al., No. 15-2080 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 23, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed another invalidity

비자명성(Non-Obviousness)에 의한 거절이유가 2 부족할 때
  • Sughrue Mion PLLC
  • South Korea, USA
  • October 4 2016

미국 특허법에서 35 U.S.C. 103은 특허를 받는 기술이 종래의 기술에 비추어 보았을 때 해당 분야의 통상의 기술을 가진 자에게 자명(obvious)하지 않을 것을 요구합니다. 이것은 세상에 이미 알려진 바와 비교했을 때 너무 “뻔한” 기술한테는 특허라는

No Written Description, No Problem when Prosecution History Disclaimer is Applied
  • Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2016

The Patent and Trial Appeal Board invoked the doctrine of prosecution history disclaimer to construe the claims at issue narrowly for the inter

Software and Business Method Inventions After Alice
  • Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP
  • USA
  • September 23 2016

Patent attorneys are often asked the question: “Is my idea patentable?” Often the idea is related to software or business methods. Well-known business

Amazon Defeats Appistry’s Distributed Computing Patents With Finding Of Patent Ineligibility
  • Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP
  • USA
  • September 2 2016

On July 19, 2016, the District Court for the Western District of Washington (“Court”) dismissed a patent suit because the asserted patents (U.S

DDE excludes settlement agreements; allows licenses as a “check”; addresses apportionment of accused products & services
  • Fish & Richardson PC
  • USA
  • August 25 2016

The District of Delaware, in ARTCom Innovation GMBH v. Google Inc., Case No. 14-217-RGA (Judge Richard G. Andrews) (April 28, 2016), considered

Texas Court of Appeals Refuses to Recognize Patent Agent Privilege
  • Frommer Lawrence & Haug LLP
  • USA
  • August 17 2016

In In re Silver, the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas at Dallas refused to recognize an attorney-client privilege for communications

Federal Circuit Expanding Interpretation of Step Two of the Test for Patent Eligibility
  • White & Case LLP
  • USA
  • August 4 2016

The Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court's decision granting a motion to dismiss a patent under 35 U.S.C. 101 in Bascom Global

BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, AT&T Corp. (decided June 27, 2016)
  • Workman Nydegger
  • USA
  • July 28 2016

BASCOM sued AT&T for infringement of BASCOM’s U.S. Patent No. 5,987,606. The case was dismissed by the District Court on the grounds that the claims