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.
Results 1 to 5 of 13
Most popular |Most recent

Lessons from the recent Supreme Court Term: ordinary rules apply in patent cases

USA - August 18 2014 If the judges on the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit choose to reflect on the recently concluded Term of the United States...

Megan E. Bussey.

Myriad questions with but two answers: isolated DNA is patentable subject matter but certain diagnostic method claims are patent

USA - July 29 2011 In reversing the summary judgment of the Southern District of New York, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held today in an opinion by Judge Lourie that claims to isolated DNA and claims for methods of screening potential cancer therapeutics were directed to patentable subject matter....

Wendy Choi, Charles W. Calkins, William B. Kezer Ph.D., Leslie T. Grab, Jennifer Giordano Coltart.

What you know may hurt you, but what you try to avoid knowing may hurt just as much

USA - May 31 2011 On May 31, 2011, the Supreme Court clarified an important question of patent law, namely, the level of knowledge required of a defendant accused of inducing patent infringement....

William H. Boice, A. James Isbester.

Divided infringement theory knocked out of joint?

USA - January 27 2011 The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled last week that to “use” a system for purposes of infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271(a), “a party must put the invention into service, i.e., control the system as a whole and obtain benefit from it.”...

Renae A. Bailey, Theodore T. Herhold, Steven D. Moore.

25 percent rule for damages is now 100 percent dead; expert reports must now predicate damages on the specific circumstances of the case, not general, arbitrary theories

USA - January 10 2011 The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled last week that a damage expert's arbitrary use of what had become a commonplace starting point for royalty rates in patent cases, the so-called "25 percent rule," is a "fundamentally flawed tool" for determining a reasonable royalty and "is thus inadmissible under Daubert and the Federal Rules of Evidence....

Audra A. Dial, Robert D.Tadlock, Theodore T. Herhold.