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 441

Wi-LAN, Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 2015-1256 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2016)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2016

A district court may consider claim construction arguments raised for the first time on a motion to reconsider


Veritas Technologies LLC v. Veeam Software Corporation, No. 2015-1894 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 30, 2016)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2016

PTAB may not summarily dismiss patent owner’s motions to further amend combination claims


Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., No. 2015-2073 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 10, 2016)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2016

“Common sense” may provide a missing limitation in an obviousness analysis only when supported by evidence and a reasoned explanation


In re: CSB-System International, Inc., No. 2015-1832 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2016)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2016

Once a patent expires, the USPTO must construe claims pursuant to Phillips rather than utilizing broadest reasonable interpretation


Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., No. 2013-1472 and 2013-1656 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 5, 2016)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2016

Decisions regarding enhanced damages applying the old Seagate standard require remand in light of the Supreme Court’s Halo decision


Murata Machinery USA, Inc. v. Daifuka Co., Ltd., No. 2015-2094 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 1, 2016)
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • September 20 2016

District courts have broad discretion to grant a stay of proceedings, but denial of a preliminary injunction motion must be supported by findings of fact and conclusions of law


Amgen Inc. v. Apotex Inc
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • August 29 2016

Amgen Inc. brought an action against Apotex Inc. under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act (BPCIA) alleging that Apotex’s marketing of


Wi-Lan, Inc. v. Apple, Inc
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • February 12 2016

The patentee claimed infringement of a wireless communication technique embodied in several modern wireless communication standards. The district


Polar Electro Oy v. Suunto Oy
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • August 29 2016

The patentee appealed the district court’s decision granting the alleged infringer’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction. The alleged


PTAB explains circumstances where cross-examination of declarant may be limited to grounds on which trial is instituted
  • Winston & Strawn LLP
  • USA
  • December 9 2013

The PTAB recently clarified the instances in which it might consider a motion to limit the cross-examination of a declarant and when it might not