WASHINGTON, D.C. - Finding that the counterclaimant in a dispute over the ownership of certain motion picture technology "fail[ed] to carry the high burden . . . to overturn [a] district court's discovery determination," a Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals panel on Nov. 17 denied the firm's motion for a writ of mandamus for relief from an order compelling production of purportedly privileged documents (In re: Rearden LLC, et al., No. 16-125, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 20637).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in concluding that it would have been obvious for a person of ordinary skill in the art to store information and data in separate memories when maintaining the information during a loss in power, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Nov. 15 in a dispute over patented radio frequency identification (RFID) tags (Intermec Technologies Corp., et al. v. Alien Technology LLC, No. 15-1808, Fed. Cir.).
NEW YORK - A New York federal judge on Nov. 3 granted an English company's petition to confirm a $3.2 million arbitral award plus interest issued in its favor in relation to a patent license agreement dispute, finding that the respondent was not entitled to deduct amounts from the award to satisfy Taiwanese tax laws (Mondis Technology Ltd. v. Wistron Corporation, No. 15-CV-02340, S.D. N.Y.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152785).
Wright Medical Technology Inc. and plaintiff attorneys on Nov. 2 announced a $240 million opt-in master settlement agreement for 1,292 state and federal court metal-on-metal hip revision claims.
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The U.S. government on Oct. 31 opposed a liberty advocacy organization's motion to compel an officer of the Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) to preserve emails in his private email account in accord with a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, telling a District of Columbia federal court that the group has not met its burden to demonstrate the preservation order's necessity (Competitive Enterprise Institute v. Office of Science and Technology Policy, No. 1:14-cv-00765, D. D.C.).
DETROIT - Allegations that a former licensee infringed a patented method and apparatus for micro-treating steel by continuing to use the technology after its license expired were rejected by a Michigan federal judge on Oct. 31 (SFP Works LLC v. Buffalo Armory LLC, No. 14-13575, E.D. Mich.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 150112).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The chairman of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology wrote a letter to the administrator of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on Oct. 25 stating that the committee has obtained information that "appears to contradict" the administrator's responses to questions the committee posed regarding the EPA's oversight of the herbicide glyphosate. In the letter, the chairman indicates that in light of the contradictions, the EPA's decision to delay official review of glyphosate does not "instill confidence that EPA will fairly assess glyphosate based on sound science."
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Nothing in the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee (136 S. Ct. 2131 ) alters a 2015 conclusion by the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals that a determination by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to discontinue inter partes review (IPR) is not reviewable on appeal under 35 U.S. Code Section 314(d), the Federal Circuit ruled Oct. 20, denying a petition for rehearing (Medtronic Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems Inc., Nos. 15-1977, -1986, -1987, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18855).
DETROIT - In a patent infringement lawsuit concerning car navigational methods, a Michigan federal judge ruled Oct. 14 that damages experts failed to present a reliable methodology for a conjoint study to assist a jury in determining what portion of Garmin International Inc.'s profits could be attributed to the incremental value that the four patented features added to the overall value of the accused devices (Visteon Global Technologies Inc. and Visteon Technologies LLC v. Garmin International Inc., No. 10-10578, E.D. Mich.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 142395).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Massachusetts federal judge properly construed various disputed terms of two patents relating to three-dimensional scaffolding for growing cells in vitro to produce organ tissue, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Oct. 13 (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, et al. v. Shire Pharmaceuticals Inc., et. al., No. 15-1881, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18426).
SAN JOSE, Calif. - A federal judge in California on Oct. 12 granted several motions to dismiss filed by defendants in a securities class action lawsuit against a semiconductor producer and certain of its current and former executive officers, ruling that the lead plaintiff in the action failed to plead the elements of its securities fraud claims as required (Daniel Luna v. Marvell Technology Group Ltd., et al., No. 15-5447, N.D. Calif.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 141567).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - In an Oct. 7 en banc majority opinion, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals affirmed a trial court's judgment and a jury verdict in favor of Apple Inc. against Samsung Electronics Co. in a dispute over smartphone technology patents, vacating an earlier panel ruling that had reversed the lower court's ruling (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., et al., Nos. 2015-1171, 2015-1195 and 2015-1994, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 18225).
NEW YORK - A federal judge in New York on Oct. 3 denied two alleged judgment creditors' motion to disqualify opposing counsel in a case where the alleged judgment creditors are asking the court to order payment of the confirmation of a reinsurance arbitration award (AmTrust North America, Inc. and Technology Insurance Company, Inc., as judgment creditors of Pacific Re, Inc. on behalf of its protected cell Pac Re 5-AT v. Safebuilt Insurance Services Inc., No. 16-cv-06033, S.D. N.Y.).
WASHINGTON, D.C. - A Pennsylvania federal judge abused his discretion when striking a patent infringement defendant's answer and counterclaims as a sanction for failure to comply with two discovery orders, the Federal Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 29 (Drone Technologies Inc. v. Parrot S.A., et al., Nos. 15-1892, -1955, Fed. Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 17643).
PHILADELPHIA - A federal judge in Pennsylvania on Sept. 19 denied an investor's motion for relief from a previous dismissal order, ruling that the investor's newly discovered evidence was in fact available to the public months before the initial complaint in the action was filed (Steven P. Messner v. USA Technologies Inc., et al., No. 15-5427, E.D. Pa.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 127041).
NEW YORK - An insurance services company sued for allegedly not honoring a reinsurance arbitration award told a federal court in New York on Sept. 19 that the court does not hold jurisdiction over the dispute (AmTrust North America, Inc. and Technology Insurance Company, Inc., as judgment creditors of Pacific Re, Inc. on behalf of its protected cell Pac Re 5-AT v. Safebuilt Insurance Services Inc., No. 16-cv-06033, S.D. N.Y.).
ALEXANDRIA, Va. - The Patent Trial and Appeal Board on Sept. 14 revealed that it will review a patent covering teleconference technology, at the request of Microsoft Corp. (Microsoft Corp. v. Keith A. Raniere, No. IPR2016-00663, PTAB).
DETROIT - An expert may offer damages testimony on behalf of Garmin International Inc. in a patent infringement lawsuit concerning car navigational methods, a Michigan federal judge ruled Sept. 12 (Visteon Global Technologies Inc. and Visteon Technologies LLC v. Garmin International Inc., No. 10-10578, E.D. Mich.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 122922).
NEW YORK - Parties that sued to enforce a $7.8 million judgment in their favor told a federal court in New York on Sept. 12 that the court holds jurisdiction over the party the judgment was against (AmTrust North America, Inc. and Technology Insurance Company, Inc., as judgment creditors of Pacific Re, Inc. on behalf of its protected cell Pac Re 5-AT v. Safebuilt Insurance Services Inc., No. 16-cv-06033, S.D. N.Y.).
SAN FRANCISCO - A California federal court had no authority to rule on the enforceability of arbitration agreements entered into between Uber Technologies Inc. and its drivers except as to a representative claim under California's Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA), a Ninth Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals ruled Sept. 7 (Abdul Kadir Mohamed, et al. v. Uber Technologies, Inc., et al., Nos. 15-16178 and 15-16250, Ronald Gillette v. Uber Technologies, Inc., No. 15-16181, 9th Cir.; 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 16413).
WILMINGTON, Del. - Efforts by a patent infringement defendant to obtain dismissal of allegations that it infringed four patents were unsuccessful on Sept. 7 when a Delaware federal judge found that it remains unclear whether the patents in suit are invalid under 35 U.S. Code Section 101 (JSDQ Mesh Technologies LLC v. Fluidmesh Networks LLC, No. 16-212, D. Del.; 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 119811).