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 337

Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2016

Royalties for SEPs cannot include the value of standarization regardless of whether the patentee committed to licensing subject to RAND terms


MCM Portfolio LLC v. Hewlett-Packard Company
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2016

IPRs do not violate either Article III or the Seventh Amendment’s right to trial by jury


Sightsound Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc.
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2016

The Federal Circuit has jurisdiction to review whether a patent claims a covered business method and lacks jurisdiction to review initiation of CBM


Prolitec, Inc. v. Scentair Technologies, Inc.
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2016

Art included in the original prosecution is “prior art of record” in an IPR proceeding even if not cited in the IPR petition


Cardsoft, LLC v. Verifone, Inc.
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2016

Precedents informing the meaning of a claim term are not extrinsic evidence when those precedents are consistent with the intrinsic record


Redline Detection, LLC v. Star Envirotech, Inc.
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • January 14 2016

The PTAB has authority to deny a motion for supplemental information even if the motion meets the requirements for submitting supplemental


Whether the Federal Circuit chose the strongest response or the best response to the patent exhaustion question in JVC Kenwood v. Nero
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • October 2 2015

The U.S. Supreme Court decision in Quanta opened the door for exhausting method claims upon the authorized sale of components that substantially


Helping the U.S. Federal Circuit find a place for Jazz Photo in the legal landscape of international patent exhaustion: will “lex” mark the spot?
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • July 15 2015

Does a foreign sale of a product practicing a U.S. patent (or substantially embodying a U.S. patent) ever exhaust the U.S. patent holder's rights


Epos Technologies Ltd. et al. v. Pegasus Technologies Ltd. et al., Case No. 2013-1330 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 5, 2014).
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 17 2014

Summary judgment of noninfringement was improper because of the district court's erroneous claim constructions. The patentee owns six patents


In re Nokia Inc. & Nokia Corp., No. 2014-133 (Fed. Cir. 2014)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • July 30 2014

Federal Circuit's remand order stating that a specific argument "may be raised on remand" did not require the International Trade Commission