http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/news.aspx Headline Patents Legal News from LexisNexis® en-us http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/images/lexismealeyslogo.gif 130 29 http://www.lexisnexis.com/mealeys/news.aspx Copyright 2012 http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - Attorneys agreed upon a jury charge and special verdict form on May 14 in the second phase of Oracle America Inc.'s dispute with Google Inc.; that day, Google sought judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) that Oracle failed to prove literal patent infringement and that one of the two patents in suit is invalid because of improper broadening (Oracle America Inc. v. Google Inc., No. 10-3561, N.D. Calif.; See 5/2/12, Page 20). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - Although largely agreeing with a California federal judge's decision to deny a preliminary injunction in a patent dispute over smart phone and tablet technology, a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on May 14 nonetheless found that plaintiff Apple Inc. might still be entitled to limited relief (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., No. 12-1105, Fed. Cir.; See 7/22/11, Page 9). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - Failure by patent infringement defendant Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. to produce source code within the time limits proscribed by a discovery order resulted in an award of preclusive sanctions on May 4 to plaintiff Apple Inc. (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., No. 11-1846, N.D. Calif.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank LAS VEGAS - A federal judge in Nevada on May 14 reversed a magistrate judge's recommendation to impose terminating sanctions against defendants in a patent infringement case and ordered the new magistrate judge in the case to conduct an evidentiary hearing based on evidence presented by the parties during the briefing on the defendants' objection (Home Gambling Network Inc., et al. v. Chris Piche, et al., No. 05-cv-00610-DAE-VCF, D. Nev.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66754). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN JOSE - In a patent case related to mobile device technology, a federal judge in California on May14 denied Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.'s motion to dismiss several of Apple Inc.'s amended counterclaims, including a claim alleging that Samsung made misrepresentations to standards-setting organizations (SSOs) in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act, but the judge granted Samsung's motion to dismiss Apple's counterclaim for promissory estoppel, breach of contract and declaratory judgment (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al., No. 11-1846, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67102.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank PHILADELPHIA - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on May 11 granted summary judgment to the producers and distributors of Wellbutrin XL on direct and indirect purchasers' claims that the defendants illegally conspired to prevent generic versions of the drug from entering the American market by filing sham patent infringement lawsuits and a citizen petition (In re: Wellbutrin XL Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 08-2431 [direct], 08-2431 [indirect], E.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 66312; See 4/6/09, Page 15). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Online photo sharing company Shutterfly Inc. on May 9 filed a brief in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York opposing bankrupt Eastman Kodak Co.'s motion for relief from the automatic stay, which it seeks to pursue a patent case against Shutterfly, contending that the only conclusion is that Kodak's motion should be denied (In Re: Eastman Kodak Company, No. 12-10202, Chapter 11, S.D. N.Y. Bkcy.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - Because an Illinois federal judge erred in the construction of disputed patent claim terms "system memory means," "matching" and "automated exchange," the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on May 7 vacated in part and remanded in part a final judgment of noninfringement (Chicago Board Options Exchange Inc. v. International Securities Exchange LLC, Nos. 11-1267, 1298, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank HONOLULU - A Hawaii-based patent plaintiff will need to litigate its claims in at least three different federal courts, a Hawaii federal judge ruled May 9 (GPNE Corp. v. Apple Inc., et al., No. 11-426, D. Hawaii; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 65026). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - Eight patent infringement defendants saw their petition for a writ of mandamus granted May 4 by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, which directed a Texas federal court on remand to determine whether the claims arise "out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences" pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) (In re: EMC Corporation, Misc. No. 100, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SEATTLE - A Washington federal judge on May 14 issued a preliminary anti-suit injunction barring Motorola Inc. from attempting to enforce relief it won May 2 in European patent litigation with Microsoft Corp. (Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola Inc., No. 10-1823, W.D. Wash.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A product embodying the technology disclosed in a network communication patent was offered for sale prior to the patent's critical date, a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel ruled May 8, upholding a lower court verdict and judgment that found the patent to be invalid as anticipated (Leader Technologies Inc. v. Facebook Inc., No. 2011-1366, Fed. Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 9347; See 3/21/11, Page 22). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - In a divided ruling issued May 17, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals found that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) did not erroneously disregard a related Federal Circuit ruling in upholding the rejection of a patent upon re-examination (In re: Baxter International Inc., No. 11-1073, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2014%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank Case: R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. v. Star Scientific, Inc., No. 11-1182, U.S. Sup.; See 4/16/12, Page 18. http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-24%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2015%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank Case: Abbott Laboratories v. Cordis Corporation, No. 12-1244, Fed. Cir. Appellant brief: Filed May 7 by Cordis CorpAppellant brief available 78-120521-010B http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - Generic drug manufacturers may employ the Hatch-Waxman Act's counterclaim provision - known as a Section viii statement - to force correction of an inaccurate label when the brand-name drug's description overstates a particular method of use, the U.S. Supreme Court held April 17 (Caraco Pharmaceutical Laboratories Ltd. and Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. v. Novo Nordisk A/S/ and Novo Nordisk Inc., No. 10-844, U.S. Sup.; See 12/19/11, Page 4). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. Supreme Court on April 18 rejected a call by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) for stricter evidentiary rules and an elevated standard of review in challenges to adverse patentability rulings (David J. Kappos v. Gilbert P. Hyatt, No. 10-1219, U.S. Sup.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ATLANTA - Reverse payment settlements between the holder of a drug patent and generic manufacturers of the drug did not constitute an unfair restraint on trade in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission Act, the 11th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 25 in affirming the dismissal of the Federal Trade Commission's antitrust lawsuit (Federal Trade Commission v. Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc., et al., No. 10-12729, 11th Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8377). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank OAKLAND, Calif. - PNY Technologies Inc. failed to sufficiently allege that SanDisk Corp. misused the market power inherent in its patent portfolio in the flash memory technology upstream market to demand multitiered licensing and royalties in the downstream markets, a federal judge in California ruled April 20 in dismissing PNY's antitrust complaint (PNY Technologies, Inc. v. SanDisk Corporation, No. C-11-04689, N.D. Calif.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55965). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - For a second time, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals will weigh in on a dispute over the patentability of diagnostic test kits used to identify an inherited hereditary risk of breast and ovarian cancer, according to an April 30 order (Association for Molecular Pathology et al. v. U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and Myriad Genetics Inc., No. 10-1406, Fed. Cir.; See 4/2/12, Page 6). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Texas federal judge properly acquitted Apple Inc. of patent infringement allegations levied by a patent holder in connection with the iTunes website and iPod listening device, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 25 (ZapMedia Services Inc. v. Apple Inc., No. 11-1546, Fed. Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 8273). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Wisconsin judge did not err in awarding a defendant summary judgment of noninfringement on grounds that an accused sippy cup lacks a limitation claimed by the patent in suit, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled March 30 (Learning Curve Brands v. Munchkin Inc., No. 11-1036, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A New York federal judge did not err in granting generic drug manufacturers a judgment of noninfringement on the pleadings for their abbreviated new drug application (ANDA) related to only one use for the drug in question and not the combination of uses claimed by the patent in suit, a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 16 (Bayer Schering Pharma AG v. Lupin Ltd. et al., Nos. 11-1143, -1228, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank TAMPA, Fla. - A Florida federal judge on April 13 found that exercising personal jurisdiction over a declaratory judgment patent infringement defendant would violate due process requirements (Paws Aboard LLC v. Pietro DiDonato, No. 11-1978, M.D. Fla.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 52061). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WILMINGTON, Del. - A request for dismissal of a dispute over Amazon.com Inc.'s Kindle e-reader was denied April 25 by a Delaware federal judge, who deemed the motion premature (Technology Innovations LLC v. Amazon.com Inc., No. 11-690, D. Del.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 57853). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank NEW YORK - Deeming a patent infringement plaintiff's claims "not objectively reasonable" and "simply not close on the merits," a New York federal judge on April 11 granted a prevailing defendant's motion for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 (Source Vagabond Systems Ltd. v. Hydrapak Inc., No. 11-5379, S.D. N.Y.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank Case: Research & Diagnostic Systems, Inc., and Techne Corporation v. Streck, Inc., No. 11-1212, U.S. Sup. http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-23%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank Case: Becton, Dickinson and Company v. Retractable Technologies, Inc., et al., No. 11-1278, U.S. Sup.; 2012 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1652; See 4/2/12, Page 20. http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%201%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A dispute over patents relating to the administration of the chemotherapy cancer drug Taxotere was properly resolved with findings of patent invalidity and unenforceability, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 9 (Aventis Pharma S.A. and Sanofi-Aventis U.S. LLC v. Hospira Inc. and Apotex Inc., No. 11-1018, Fed. Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 7095). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%202%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A December summary order affirming dismissal of legal malpractice claims stemming from the prosecution of several video-streaming patents will not be reheard by an en banc Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, according to an April 11 order (Memorylink Corp. v. Motorola Inc., No. 10-1533, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%203%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - A stipulated judgment of noninfringement in a dispute over smart card technology will stand, thanks to an April 11 ruling by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Smartmetric Inc. v. American Express Company, No. 11-1473, Fed. Cir.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%204%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WASHINGTON, D.C. - Citing an erroneous construction of the non-claim term "perforated," a divided Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on April 3 reversed a New York judge's summary judgment of noninfringement and remanded the dispute for further proceedings (Advanced Fiber Technologies v. J&L Fiber Services Inc., No. 11-1243, Fed. Cir.; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 6641). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%205%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - Purchasers of Cipro on March 27 filed their opening brief urging the California Supreme Court to review the Court of Appeal's ruling that pay-for-delay settlement agreements between the manufacturer of a branded antibiotic and its generic competitors do not violate California antitrust laws (In re Cipro Cases I & II, No. S198616, Calif. Sup.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%206%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank ST. LOUIS - Citing the convenience of the parties, a Missouri federal judge on April 6 agreed to transfer a patent infringement dispute over an information processing method to the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (Compression Technology Solutions LLC v. EMC Corporation, et al., No. 11-1579, E.D. Mo.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48887). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%207%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank HARRISBURG, Pa. - Finding that a patent infringement plaintiff has failed to meet the three requirements for specific jurisdiction set forth in Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com (952 F. Supp. 1119, 1122-23 [W.D. Pa. 1997]), a Pennsylvania federal judge on April 10 dismissed the case (Surface Preparation Technologies v. Jamaco Industries LLC, et al., No. 11-1978, M.D. Pa.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50146). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%208%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN DIEGO - Allegations of indirect patent infringement were dismissed March 29 by a California federal judge, who granted the plaintiff leave to amend its complaint (Novatel Wireless Inc. v. Franklin Wireless Corp., et al., No. 10-2530, S.D. Calif.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%209%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank WILMINGTON, Del. - Assertions by patent infringement defendants Amazon.com Inc. and Zappos Inc. that an April 2011 complaint filed against them fails to state a claim were rejected April 4 by a Delaware federal judge, who deemed dismissal "premature" (Walker Digital LLC v. Fandango Inc., et al., No. 11-313, D. Del.; 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 48080). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2010%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank SAN FRANCISCO - In an answer filed April 3 in California federal court, Facebook Inc. fired back at claims of patent infringement levied last month by Yahoo! Inc. (Yahoo! Inc. v. Facebook Inc., No. 12-1212, N.D. Calif.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2011%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank MINNEAPOLIS - A defendant fired back at patent infringement plaintiff Honeywell International Inc. on April 12, calling the underlying allegations "a bald effort . . . to inhibit competition from a promising new company and product" (Honeywell International Inc. v. Nest Labs Inc., No. 12-299, D. Minn.). http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2012%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank Case: R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, et al. v. Star Scientific, Inc., No. 11-1182, U.S. Sup.; 2012 U.S. S. Ct. Briefs LEXIS 1265. http://www.lexis.com/research/xlink?canceldest=form&keyenum=25271&keytnum=0&searchtype=get&search=19-22%20Mealey%27s%20Litig.%20Rep.%20Patents%2013%20(2012)&view=full&ORIGINATION_CODE=00144 target=_blank Case: Victor Stanley, Inc. v. Creative Pipe, Inc., and Mark T. Pappas, No. 11-2250, 4th Cir.; See 3/19/12, Page 23.