WASHINGTON, D.C. - Although largely affirming a Texas federal judge's claim construction and denial of a Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. request for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) that two patents are invalid as obvious, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 17 nonetheless vacated a ruling that a patent owner's damages should not be limited on the basis of its failure to mark products as patented (Rembrandt Wireless Technologies L.P. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., et al., No. 16-1729, Fed. Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6502).
PORTLAND, Ore. - While allowing expert testimony on objective considerations of nonobviousness, an Oregon federal judge also granted in part summary judgment on April 12 to a sportswear company that certain prior art references do not anticipate utility patents relating to heat-directing elements to a garment's innermost surface (Columbia Sportswear North America Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories Inc., No. 15-00064, D. Ore., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55714).
PHILADELPHIA - Allegations by myriad plaintiffs that the companies that hold patents for the brand name drugs Lipitor and Effexor XR engaged in fraudulent patent procurement - known as Walker Process fraud pursuant to Walker Process Equip., Inc. v. Food Mach. & Chem. Corp., 382 U.S. 172 (1965) - do not arise under federal patent law, such that an appeal in the case must necessarily proceed in the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals, the Third Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 13 (In re: Lipitor Antitrust Litigation, Nos. 14-4202, -4203, -4204, -4205, -4206, -4602, -4632, 15-1184, -1185, -1186, -1187, -1274, -1323 and 15-134, 3rd Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6346).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Allegations that Apple Inc. infringed a patent claim directed to a means of sending packet data from a cellular telephone to a network through the use of a selected channel were properly rejected by a Texas federal judge and jury, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 14 (Core Wireless Licensing S.a.r.l. v. Apple Inc., No. 15-2037, Fed. Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6410).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A federal judge in Oregon properly found that the University of Massachusetts (UMass) is entitled to sovereign immunity in a lawsuit seeking a correction of patent inventorship, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 12 (Mussa Ali v. Carnegie Institution of Washington, No. 16-2320, Fed. Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6250).
LOS ANGELES - A California federal judge on April 10 granted a motion filed by a company that alleges that another entity violated California's unfair completion (UCL) and false advertising laws when it sold trademarked domain names, finding the company in contempt of a temporary restraining order and injunction (UL LLC v. The Space Chariot Inc., et al., No. 2:16-cv-08172, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56147).
CLEVELAND - A declaratory judgment plaintiff-franchisee prevailed in part on its request for summary judgment on April 12, when an Ohio federal judge agreed that there is no direct evidence that it infringed copyrighted architectural works and that the copyright owner failed to demonstrate substantial similarity (Robert L. Stark Enterprises Inc. v. Neptune Design Group LLC, No. 16-264, N.D. Ohio; 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 55951).
CINCINNATI - The Sixth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals on April 11 affirmed a lower federal court's ruling that a business liability policy does not provide coverage for false advertising claims brought against an eye health supplement maker insured by a competitor, finding that the insured failed to demonstrate that the underlying complaint alleged a product disparagement claim (Vitamin Health, Inc. v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Co., No.16-1724, 6th Cir.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - Six claims of a patented method for location sharing and mobile phone tracking are unpatentable as anticipated, Uber Technologies Inc. alleges in an April 7 petition for inter partes review (Uber Technologies Inc. v. X One Inc., No. IPR2017-01255, PTAB).
PASADENA, Calif. - A Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel correctly found that it was not liable for its users' posting of copyrighted adult pictures, a usenet service provider asserts in an April 10 brief opposing an adult entertainment firm's petition for rehearing, arguing that the panel applied the correct standard for determining vicarious liability (Perfect 10 Inc. v. Giganews Inc., et al., No. 15-55500, 15-55523 and 15-56026, 9th Cir.).
BOWLING GREEN, Ky. - After refusing to exclude expert testimony from both sides in a patent infringement case involving disposable pants-type diapers, a Kentucky federal judge on April 10 granted and denied in part summary judgment of noninfringement to a baby diaper manufacturer on certain accused products (SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag, et al. v. First Quality Baby Products LLC, et al., No. 10-00122, W.D. Ky., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54167).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - In an April 10 ruling that largely affirmed findings by a patent examiner, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board deemed 16 claims of a patented sheath used with an anastomosis for the prevention of fluid leaks unpatentable (Ex parte Joshua Stopek, Jacqueline Jones and Amin Elachchabi, No. 2015-005258, PTAB).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - Although agreeing with a petitioner that three claims of a malware protection patent are obvious, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board on April 11 confirmed the patentability of nine other claims (Palo Alto Networks Inc., et al. v. Finjan Inc., No. IPR2016-00159, PTAB).
BROOKLYN, N.Y. - Citing the views of the U.S. Copyright Office, a New York federal judge on April 8 found that if a plaintiff's ambient songs are ultimately adjudged to be the same musical works as non-ambient songs, Amazon.com Inc. is not required to serve a copyright owner with additional notices of intent (NOIs) to obtain compulsory licenses (Yesh Music LLC, et al. v. Amazon.com Inc., et al., No. 16-1406, E.D. N.Y., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 54417).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A determination that various claims of a patented method for providing and editing medical records are directed to patent-eligible subject matter was debated April 7 in oral arguments before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Preservation Wellness Technologies LLC v. Allscripts Healthcare Solutions Inc., No. 16-2193, Fed. Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO - Findings by a California federal judge that a copyright infringement defendant social media platform is entitled to safe-harbor immunity under Section 512(c) of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 512(c), were reversed and remanded April 7 by the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Mavrix Photographs LLC v. LiveJournal Inc., No. 14-56956, 9th Cir.; 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 6028).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A dispute over an award of prejudgment interest in a longstanding dispute over patented transformer packaging was argued April 5 before the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals (Halo Electronics Inc. v. Pulse Electronics Inc., No. 16-2006, Fed. Cir.).
SAN FRANCISCO - In a complaint filed April 6 in a California federal court, Twitter Inc. says that a government-issued summons seeking to identify the operator of an account critical of the government exceeds the authority of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and runs afoul of the right to speak anonymously under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (Twitter Inc. v. U.S. Department of Homeland Security, et al., No. 3:17-cv-01916, N.D. Calif.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - An Illinois federal judge's bench trial final judgment of infringement was reversed April 6 in a longstanding legal dispute over a patented process for preparing anticoagulant drugs featuring bivalirudin as an active ingredient (The Medicines Co. v. Mylan Inc., et al., Nos. 2015-1113, -1151, -1181, Fed. Cir.).
SAN DIEGO - In a patent infringement lawsuit, a California federal judge on April 3 addressed several motions to exclude testimony on damages and reasonable royalty with regard to the alleged infringement by wireless companies to a patent relating to a mobile communication system with a moving base station (Carucel Investments L.P. v. Novatel Wireless Inc., et al., No. 16-118, S.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50855).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - In an April 4 petition for inter partes review by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Apple Inc. took aim at a patent that describes perceptually weighting speech signals during encoding (Apple Inc. v. St. Lawrence Communications LLC, No. IPR2017-01244, PTAB).
INDIANAPOLIS - An Indiana federal judge on April 5 adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation and extended a preliminary injunction against a woman who allegedly began operating a competing fitness business using a fitness franchisor's trademarks, logos and confidential information, saying that she failed to show that the order was clearly in error (Get in Shape Franchise Inc. v. TFL Fishers LLC, et al., No. 1:16-cv-01374, S.D. Ind., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 51626).
SAN FRANCISCO - An order that granted a special motion to strike a common-law right of publicity claim pursuant to California's anti-SLAPP statute was not erroneous because the claims are preempted by Section 301 of the federal Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 101 et seq., the Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled April 5 (Patrick Maloney, et al. v. T3Media Inc., No. 15-55630, 9th Cir., 2017 U.S. App. LEXIS 5894).
RIVERSIDE, Calif. - A California federal judge on April 3 entered final judgment in favor of a commercial general liability insurer after finding that it has no duty to defend its insured against an underlying trademark and trade dress infringement lawsuit because the insurance policy's intellectual property exclusion bars coverage for all claims (Secard Pools, Inc., et al. v. Kinsale Insurance Co., No. 16-02404, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 47871).
LOS ANGELES - Pop singer Katy Perry on April 3 prevailed in a dispute over her song "Dark Horse," when a California federal judge agreed that Perry's public performance of the work at concerts during her "Prismatic World Tour" cannot, at the summary judgment stage, form the basis of a copyright infringement claim (Marcus Gray, et al. v. Katy Perry, et al., No. 15-5642, C.D. Calif., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 50803).