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 142

Invalidating a patent on a motion to dismiss is proper
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • January 29 2015

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit did not find the patentee’s infringement suit to be objectively baseless, notwithstanding that the


Yet another court weighs in on FRAND rates (this time for Wi-Fi)
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 31 2013

The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, after a bench trial limited to the issue of determining a FRAND rate for licensing a


Petitioner wins uncontested Alice fight
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 30 2015

In a decision to institute post-grant review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) clarified the importance of corroboration to


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


The hacker who avoided a false marking claim
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • May 28 2011

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s dismissal, with prejudice, of a false marking complaint, finding that the complaint failed to properly allege an “unpatented article” under 35 U.S.C. 292


Common sense variation is unpatentable
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • May 28 2011

Affirming the district court’s grant of summary judgment of invalidity, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a common-sense variation of known technology is unpatentable


Posner to AppleMotorola: no damages, no injunction, no trial
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 31 2012

Judge Posner (of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit), sitting by designation, derailed Apple’s and Motorola’s expected patent liability trial when he found that both parties provided insufficient evidence to support either damages or injunctive relief


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


First patents survive inter partes review fully intact
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • May 29 2014

In the past several months, decisions have been rendered in the first wave of inter partes reviews filed under the American Invents Act (AIA). The


The law of software subject-matter eligibility remains unsettled
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 31 2013

Revisiting the issue of patent subject-matter eligibility in software patents, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower