LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Copyright, Patent Cases

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The U.S. Supreme Court on Oct. 1 announced that it will hear oral arguments in three intellectual property disputes presenting issues that range from the availability of a laches defense to the proper standard for an award of attorney fees. In the first list...

Burden of Proof for Patent Licensees Debated at Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) To uphold findings by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a patent licensee bears the burden of proving noninfringement “would impair the purpose and utility of the Declaratory Judgment Act,” an attorney for petitioner Medtronic Inc. told...

False Advertising Standing Argued at Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The proper analytical framework for assessing standing in Lanham Act false advertising cases is the same for assessing standing in an antitrust action, counsel for Lexmark International Inc. told the U.S. Supreme Court Dec. 3 ( Lexmark International Inc. v. Static...

Supreme Court Grants Certiorari in Copyright, Patent, Lanham Act Cases

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Jan. 10 that it will hear four intellectual property cases in an upcoming term, covering issues ranging from the streaming of copyrighted content over the Internet to the rights of private companies to challenge false labels...

Mary LaFrance on the Patent Eligibility of Computer-Implemented Inventions: CLS Bank International v. Alice Corp.

The Supreme Court's previous musings on the patent-eligibility of software under § 101 have failed to provide the guidance needed by lower courts, practitioners, and patent owners. It illustrates the utter confusion. The jurists with the greatest sophistication on matters of patent law -- the...

LaFrance on Standing to Bring False Advertising Claims under Section 43(a) of the Lanham Act

Lexmark Int'l Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., 697 F.3d 387 (6th Cir. 2012) Excerpt: In the never-ending toner wars, ink will once again be spilled as the Supreme Court considers a false advertising dispute in Lexmark Int'l Inc. v. Static Control Components ., 697 F.3d 387 (6th...

Supreme Court Affirms: False Advertising Counterclaimant Has Standing

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) In a unanimous decision, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that “to come within the zone of interests in a suit for false advertising under” Section 1125(a) of the Lanham Act, “a plaintiff must allege an injury to a commercial interest in reputation...

Supreme Court Will Hear Dispute Over De Novo Claim Construction Review

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The question of which standard — de novo or only for clear error — the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals should apply when reviewing a district court’s factual findings in support of a claim construction in patent cases will be argued at...

Supreme Court Hears Dispute Over Patent Indefiniteness Standard

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealeys’) A patent claim is not rendered indefinite simply because it requires interpretation between two or more competing readings, a government attorney told the U.S. Supreme Court on April 28 ( Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments Inc. , No. 13-369, U.S. Sup.; See 1...

Induced Infringement Standard Debated at Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The U.S. Supreme Court yesterday expressed uncertainty about how best to proceed in a dispute that poses the question of whether induced patent infringement liability can be established without also proving direct infringement ( Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai...

U.S. Supreme Court: No Inducement Liability Without Direct Infringement

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a unanimous holding today, the U.S. Supreme Court found that a defendant is not liable for inducing infringement under 35 U.S. Code Section 271(b) when no one has directly infringed under Section 271(a) or “any other statutory provision” ( Limelight Networks Inc...

Supreme Court Defines Standard For Holding a Patent Indefinite

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey's) Vacating an April 2013 ruling by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the U.S. Supreme Court held June 2 that “a patent is invalid for indefiniteness if its claims, read in light of the patent’s specification and prosecution history, fail to inform...

Nautilus Decision to Drive PGR and CBM Filings

Decision Indirectly Highlights Value of Post-Grant Challenges Yesterday, the Supreme Court decided that the Federal Circuit’s “insolubly ambiguous” framework for analyzing indefiniteness was, well…. indefinite. In Nautilus Inc. v Biosig Instruments, Inc., the court found that...

Fitch Even IP Alert: Supreme Court Addresses Definiteness Requirement for Patent Claims

The U.S. Patent Act requires that a patent specification “conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctively claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as the invention.” In Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. , the U.S. Supreme Court addressed...

Supreme Court: Food Label Challenges Are Allowable Under Lanham Act

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals erred in holding that a private party cannot allege Lanham Act false advertising in connection with a product label regulated under the Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled today...

Divided High Court: Aereo’s Internet Transmissions Constitute Public Performances

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) A U.S. Supreme Court majority today found that the Internet transmission of copyrighted broadcast television programs provided by Aereo Inc. constitute public performances per the “transmit clause” of the Copyright Act, reversing the Second Circuit...

LaFrance on Standing to Bring False Advertising Claims under the Lanham Act: Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.

Excerpt: Who has standing to bring a false advertising claim under the Lanham Act? In Lexmark Int'l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, 2014 US LEXIS 2214 (Mar. 25, 2014), the Supreme Court ended a three-way circuit split, and held that standing is not limited to direct competitors [an enhanced...

LaFrance on Federal False Advertising Claims Arising From FDA-Compliant Labels: POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.

Excerpt: In its second false advertising case this term, in POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co., 2014 U.S. LEXIS 4165 (June 12, 2014), the Supreme Court held that a misleading food or beverage label may be actionable under the false advertising provisions of the Lanham Act even if the label satisfies...

Supreme Court Hears Arguments in Dispute Over Claim Construction Review

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals’ practice of reviewing, de novo , factual findings by a district court in support of its claim construction in a patent case is improper, an attorney told the U.S. Supreme Court today ( Teva Pharmaceuticals USA...

Supreme Court Hears Oral Arguments in Trademark Tacking Case

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) A jury is best suited to determine when use of an older trademark may be “tacked” to a newer trademark, an attorney for a Korea-based bank told the U.S. Supreme Court today ( Hana Financial Inc. v. Hana Bank and Hana Financial Group , No. 13-1211...

Supreme Court Will Hear Dispute Over Patent Royalty Agreements

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari Dec. 12 in a case that could decide the continued viability of a longstanding precedent that licensing agreements that extend beyond the expiration date of a patent are unenforceable ( Stephen Kimble, et al. v. Marvel...

Supreme Court: Patent Claim Construction Subject to ‘Clear Error’ Review

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) In a divided ruling today, the U.S. Supreme Court deemed improper a practice by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals of reviewing de novo district court findings — including subsidiary facts — in support of patent claim construction ( Teva Pharmaceuticals...

Supreme Court Affirms: Trademark Tacking Should Be Decided by Juries

WASHINGTON, D.C. — A unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held today that jurors, not judges, are best positioned to answer the question of whether use of an older trademark may be “tacked” to a newer mark ( Hana Financial Inc. v. Hana Bank and Hana Financial Group , No. 13-1211, U.S. Sup.;...

Teva v. Sandoz & the PTAB

PTAB Claim Constructions Often Limited to Intrinsic Record On January 20, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., et al v. Sandoz, Inc. et al., ( here ) the U.S. Supreme Court reversed decades of CAFC precedent permitting de novo review of district court patent claim constructions [lexis.com subscribers...

Supreme Court Hears Dispute Over Good Faith Belief of Patent Invalidity

WASHINGTON, D.C. — (Mealey’s) When facing allegations of induced patent infringement, a good faith belief that the asserted patent is invalid is an available and appropriate defense, an attorney told the U.S. Supreme Court today ( Commil USA LLC v. Cisco Systems Inc. , No. 13-896, U.S. Sup...