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 106

Foreign marketing materials relevant to domestic infringement
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • October 1 2014

In an appeal of a lower court’s summary judgment of no infringement of four patents, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the


Indemnity agreement does not equate to a “real party in interest” to create time-bar for inter partes review
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 30 2014

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB, the Board) has concluded that an inter partes review of a patent is not time-barred if a petition was filed


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


An accused device is “modified” by the installation of software
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • February 5 2014

Revisiting the wording of claims that recite a combination of hardware and software, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a


Stays of litigation warranted even when the CBM review does not address all asserted claims or all invalidity defenses
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • December 30 2014

Addressing the denial of a stay pending the covered business method (CBM) review of some, but not all, asserted claims in a district court action, the


Standing requires articulation of jurisdictional facts
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • December 30 2014

Addressing a petition for a covered business method (CBM) patent review, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or


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


ALJ gildea sets procedural schedule in Inv. No. 337-TA-778
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • July 26 2011

On July 25, 2011, ALJ Gildea set the procedural schedule for Investigation No. 337-TA-778, Certain Equipment for Communication Networks Including Switches, Routers, Gateways, Bridges, Wireless Access Points, Cable Modems, IP Phones, and Products Containing Same


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


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