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: 11-20 of 2,197

Google’s “FFF” patent plan: find it, fight it, and get it for free
  • McCarthy Tétrault LLP
  • USA
  • August 10 2015

Recently, Google has announced two new patent-related initiatives. The first being the overhaul of Google Patents, a search tool of existing patent


Final Written Decision Finding Challenged Claims Eligible for CBM Review and Unpatentable Under Section 101 CBM2014-00156
  • Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
  • USA
  • January 8 2016

In its Final Written Decision, the Board determined that claims 1-4 of the ‘100 patent were unpatentable for claiming ineligible subject matter under


Asia Chronicle: Issue 3 - JanuaryFebruary 2016
  • Morgan Lewis Stamford LLC
  • British Virgin Islands, China, Japan, Singapore, United Kingdom
  • March 1 2016

The Privy Council has unanimously held that an arbitration clause stating that ‘any party may submit the dispute to binding arbitration’ amounts to


“Upselling” patent case against Amazon dismissed
  • Leech Tishman Fuscaldo & Lampl LLC
  • USA
  • April 16 2015

On March 25, 2015, a federal judge in Delaware dismissed a patent infringement case against Amazon.com Inc., saying that the patent at issue covered


Design Patents - Could a “Real” Design Solve a “Virtual” Problem? Protecting Innovative Design Against Physical or Online Infringing Products
  • Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
  • USA
  • June 30 2016

Want to buy a Porsche 911 for only $159? Well, now you can. Or at least you can buy the virtual 3-D model of a Porsche 911 to 3-D print or to use in


No Written Description, No Problem when Prosecution History Disclaimer is Applied
  • Marshall Gerstein & Borun LLP
  • USA
  • September 30 2016

The Patent and Trial Appeal Board invoked the doctrine of prosecution history disclaimer to construe the claims at issue narrowly for the inter


Induced infringement: Federal Circuit joint AkamaiMckesson decision changes the law
  • Haynes and Boone LLP
  • USA
  • June 5 2013

For years, courts have struggled with the concept of induced infringement. 35 U.S.C. 271(b) states that "whoever actively induces infringement


New patent infringement decision could pose problems for e-commerce business
  • Vorys Sater Seymour and Pease LLP
  • USA
  • September 10 2015

In August, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, the federal appellate court with national jurisdiction over patent lawsuits


Google’s strategic purchase of rights and counterclaim do not survive Delaware’s statute of limitations
  • McDermott Will & Emery
  • USA
  • September 30 2015

Addressing the requirements for tolling the statute of limitations (SOL), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the district


Motion tracking patent invalidated in litigation involving F-35 Joint Strike Fighter
  • Duane Morris LLP
  • USA
  • July 27 2015

Last week, the Court of Federal Claims invalidated a patent that was asserted against the U.S. Government in a lawsuit regarding the F-35 Joint