1. In re Hyon, 2011-1239, UNITED
STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 10553,
May 24, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Substantial
evidence supported the finding that a person of ordinary skill in the art would
have been motivated to combine early crosslinking step of Kitamaru with process
of Zachariades to obtain the enhanced properties disclosed by Kitamaru. Reissue
claims would have been obvious, 35 U.S.C.S. § 103, in light of the prior art.
CORE TERMS: polyethylene,
crosslinking, reissue, cross-linking, block, examiner, improved, teach,
compression, combine ...
2. In re Baxter Int'l, Inc.,
2011-1073, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S.
App. LEXIS 9983, May 17, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: The
United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and
Interferences, did not err in determining that patent claims would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, under 35 U.S.C.S. § 103(a). The
clear and convincing evidence standard of
35 U.S.C.S. § 282 applied only to infringement actions.
CORE TERMS: patent,
reexamination, dialysate, examiner, user, prior art, corresponding, delivering,
machine, pump ...
3. Apple, Inc. v. Samsung Elecs.
Co., 2012-1105, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012
U.S. App. LEXIS 9720, May 14, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Patents
at issue pertained to smartphones and tablet computers. Patent owner appealed
from denial of a preliminary injunction. As to three of the four patents at
issue in this appeal, the patent owner did not satisfy its burden of
demonstrating an abuse of discretion. As to fourth patent, district court
committed legal error requiring remand.
CORE TERMS: patent,
irreparable harm, tablet, preliminary injunction, injunction, front,
infringement, smartphone, injunctive relief, screen ...
4. In re Youman, 2011-1136,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS
9346, May 8, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Regarding
35 U.S.C.S. § 251, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences did not properly
conduct step three of the recapture rule analysis. Specifically, without
conducting any analysis beyond determining that the limitations the applicants
identified as materially narrowing were not overlooked aspects, the Board did
not correctly apply step three.
CORE TERMS: reissue,
recapture, surrendered, patent, subject matter, patentee, original claim,
narrowing, patented, prior art ...
5. Leader Techs., Inc. v.
Facebook, Inc., 2011-1366, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9347, May 8, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Central
issue was whether product that was publicly used and on sale prior to December
10, 2002 fell within the scope of the asserted claims, thus rendering them
invalid under 35 U.S.C.S. § 102(b). Substantial evidence supported jury's
verdict that patent owner offered for sale and publicly demonstrated the
claimed invention prior to critical date.
CORE TERMS: user,
software, invention, patent, new trial, technology, engine, powered, jury's
verdict, invalidity ...
6. In re Montgomery, 2011-1376,
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS
9348, May 8, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Prior
art reference anticipated a claim under 35 U.S.C.S. § 102(b) if it disclosed
every claim limitation. Prior art reference disclosed a protocol for
administration of ramipril to stroke-prone patients, and administering ramipril
to stroke-prone patients inevitably treated or prevented stroke. Thus, it
inherently anticipated the claims at issue.
CORE TERMS: ramipril,
patient, stroke, patent, prevention, inhibitor, prior art, disclose, inherency,
inherently ...
7. Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Sandoz,
Inc., 2011-1126, 2011-1127, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9248, May 7, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Drug
patent claims were not invalid due to obviousness under 35 U.S.C.S. § 103
because there was no clear and convincing evidence showing that one of ordinary
skill would have been motivated to combine the asserted prior art to make the
patented chemical compound at issue and would have had a reasonable expectation
of success in doing so.
CORE TERMS: compound,
prior art, antipsychotic, aripiprazole, propoxy, butoxy, carbostyril, double,
unsubstituted, patenting ...
8. Chi. Bd. Options Exch., Inc.
v. Int'l Secs. Exch., LLC, 2011-1267, 2011-1298, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9247, May 7, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: In
a patent case, the district court erred in its construction of a
mean-plus-function limitation under 35 U.S.C.S. § 112, para. 6, because it
incorrectly identified the corresponding structure in the specification that
performed the recited function. The clearly linked structure was "system
memory."
CORE TERMS: matching,
memory, allocating, quotation, automated, parameter, incoming, specification,
trading, customer ...
9. Minkin v. Gibbons, P.C.,
2011-1178, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S.
App. LEXIS 9158; 102 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1573, May 4, 2012, Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Plaintiff
patent applicant failed to raise a single material fact in dispute as to the
non-obviousness, under 35 U.S.C.S. § 103(a), of any proposed alternate claims,
and thus failed to prove causation of an injury as a result of the alleged
legal malpractice of defendant patent attorneys, as required under New Jersey
law.
CORE TERMS: patentability,
alternate, summary judgment, prior art, malpractice, patent, nonobviousness,
handle, pivot, examiner ...
10. In re EMC Corp.,
Miscellaneous Docket No. 100, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL
CIRCUIT, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9159; 102 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1539, May 4, 2012,
Decided [enhanced version
available to lexis.com subscribers]
OVERVIEW: Alleged
patent infringers were entitled to have their motion to sever the claims
against them analyzed under the "same transaction or occurrence"
under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a) and 21, where the sameness of the accused products
was insufficient to establish that claims of infringement. Joinder for
discovery was permissible under Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(a).
CORE TERMS: joinder,
patent, occurrence, infringement, sever, series of transactions, mandamus,
transaction-or-occurrence, storage, com ...
....
Sign in with your Lexis.com ID to access Patent Law resources on Lexis.com or any of these Mathew Bender Patent Law publications.
Click here to order Patent Law treatises/resources and Mathew Bender publications.
LexisNexis Publications:
View the LexisNexis
Catalog of Legal and Professional Publications
LexisNexis eBooks
Click
here for a list of available LexisNexis eBooks.
Click here to learn more about
LexisNexis eBooks.
For more information about LexisNexis products and solutions connect with us through our corporate site.