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, …
Category: patent litigation
SCOTUS Watch: Patent Damages Extends to Foreign Lost Profits
On June 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court handed down its decision in the case, WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp.,[1] which will change the landscape for patent damages because foreign lost profits can now be assessed in patent infringement judgments. The facts are as follows. WesternGeco owns four patents directed to systems for ocean …
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: Post-TC Heartland Gaps Filled
Although the U.S. Supreme Court rendered its decision in T.C. Heartland, LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brand LLC more than one year ago, which this blog discussed, the contours of its holding are still being worked out. In T.C. Heartland, the Supreme Court held that the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. §1400(b), limits patent litigants …
Fed Circuit Watch: Technicality in Rules Does Not Eviscerate Showing Patent Infringement
Because patent infringement is the exclusive jurisdiction of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, any procedural rules governing the cases are examined under the Federal rules.[1] These confusing and arcane rules sometimes make analysis of patent cases more an exercise of rules research rather than patent law itself. An example is Disc Disease …
Fed Circuit Watch: Issue Preclusion Cannot Save Voting Method Patent From §101 Ax
On April 20, 2018, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held in Voter Verified, Inc. v. Election Sys. & Software LLC,[1] that in spite of a favorable prior judicial ruling (although not necessarily on §101 patent subject matter-eligibility), issue preclusion did not apply, and affirmed the patent-ineligibility holding by the district court. The …
Fed Circuit Watch: District Court Bungles Inventorship Issue, Holds Federal Circuit
In a blend of jurisdictional and patent formality law, James v. J2 Cloud Services, LLC,[1] deals with the question of whether the inventor retained ownership over a patent so he had standing to sue for correction-of-inventorship under 35 U.S.C. §256. The vehicle used was an agreement, so much of the analysis is an understanding of …
SCOTUS Watch: IPRs Do Not Violate Article III or Seventh Amendment
Article III of the U.S. Constitution states: The judicial power of the United States, shall be vested in one Supreme Court, and in such inferior courts as the Congress may from time to time ordain and establish.[1] Also, the Copyright and Patent Clause of the U.S. Constitution states: The Congress shall have power . . …
WesternGeco Damages Case Before SCOTUS in Doubt After Fed Circuit Ruling
A recently-issued decision from the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit may have implications on a pending case before the U.S. Supreme Court. That case, WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp.,[1] was issued May 7, 2018, and may affect how the Supreme Court rules in a related case involving the same parties and patents …
Fed Circuit Watch: Claim Construction in Earlier IPR Bars Review of Same Term in Later IPR
Steuben Foods, Inc. did not have a good week at the Federal Circuit. On March 13, 2018, two decisions were rendered against it in two patent cases, although for different rationales. The first, Nestlé USA, Inc. v. Steuben Foods, Inc.,[1] the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that Steuben Foods could not argue …