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 81

Technology transfer agreements: EU promulgates new antitrust rules
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union
  • April 30 2014

The licensing of technology is core to the business model of many companies operating in IP-sensitive industries. Its commercial benefits are myriad


Patent claims may (sort of) mix classes of subject matter but who cares?
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • April 28 2008

In a case in which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found patent claims in issue to not be fatally indefinite (for mixing statutory classes of subject matter), the patent owner (Acacia) nevertheless walked away with nothing


English High Court confirms computer program claims are legitimate
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • European Union, United Kingdom
  • February 6 2008

English High Court decision on computer program claims moves the United Kingdom into line with European Patent Offices


High Court of England and Wales assesses issues of liability and damages in misuse of customer database
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • United Kingdom
  • November 7 2013

In a case concerning the misuse of a customer database, the High Court of England and Wales has assessed damages for breach of confidence


No pre-verdict JMOL motions, no review of jury damage award
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 30 2010

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a permanent injunction and an award of $240 million in damages against Microsoft for patent infringement in connection with certain versions of MS Word software that offer XML editing functionality


Intellectual Ventures Management LLC files complaint
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 14 2011

Intellectual Ventures Management LLC, Invention Investment Fund I L.P., Invention Investment Fund II LLC, Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC, filed a letter with Secretary Holbein requesting that the Commission conduct an investigation under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended regarding Certain Dynamic Random Acces Memory and NAND Flash Memory Devices and Products Containing Same


Motorola identifies Microsoft products accused of infringement
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • August 24 2011

In response to Order No. 11 in Inv. No. 337-TA-752, Certain Gaming and Entertainment Consoles, Related Software, and Components Thereof (“753 Investigation), Motorola filed a statement identifying the products it is accusing of infringement in the 752 Investigation


Court rejects copyright protection for computer program found lacking originality
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • May 30 2007

A recent decision from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky provides important guidance about the amount of creativity required to support copyright in a computer program and the nature of fair use in the context of interoperability


Disavowed claim scope during prosecution gone for good
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • April 28 2008

Interpreting a claim preamble and related statements made during prosecution, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s summary judgment that the defendants did not infringe a patent directed to a portable microprocessor system


Corresponding structure must be an algorithm, not just a computer
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • April 28 2008

Addressing the issue of when a “means-plus-function” claim element (in the context of a computer-operated invention) suffers from 35 U.S.C. 112, 2 indefiniteness due to the absence of clearly defined corresponding structure, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s decision on summary judgment, finding all of the claims of the subject patent invalid for indefiniteness