Sometimes substantive patent issues are never dealt with in cases, but rather dispositive issues are handled by procedural mechanisms. One case in point is Momenta Pharms., Inc. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Co.,[1] which the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided on February 7, 2019. BMS owns U.S. Patent No. 8,476,239 (‘239), entitled “Stable protein …
Category: jurisdiction
Fed Circuit Watch: District Courts Still Have Problems with Cray Rule
On February 5, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for writ of mandamus, with a combined petition for rehearing and/or rehearing en banc, in In re Google LLC, the writ of mandate review stems from a patent infringement suit filed by SEVEN Networks, LLC, a mobile data analytics company, …
Fed Circuit Watch: Walker Process Case Denied En Banc Review
On June 15, 2018, an expanded panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied petitions for rehearing and rehearing en banc in a per curiam order. This case is Xitronix Corp. v. KLA-Tencor Corp.,[1] and the enlarged panel was composed of Chief Judge Prost, and Judges Newman, Lourie, Mayer, Dyk, Moore, O’Malley, …
IP & Nonhumans: Lessons of Naruto the Monkey on AI
A particular copyright case, although not dealing directly with technology, has fingerprints that lead to one area of technology that shares some legal issues with animals: artificial intelligence. On April 23, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit issued Naruto v. Slater,[1] in a ruling that was not entirely unexpected since the parties …
Fed Circuit Watch: Fed Circuit Lacks Jurisdiction to Review Antitrust Claim
On February 9, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a short order refusing jurisdiction over a Walker Process antitrust claim, and transferred the case, Xitronix Corp. v. KLA-Tencor Corp., to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. As a preliminary note, a Walker Process claim is a federal claim under …