97 results for 'cat:"Civil Procedure" AND cat:"Patent"'.
J. Stark finds that the district court improperly granted enhanced damages for willful infringement in this patent action because the patent claims were invalid, and the action should be remanded for dismissal on mootness grounds. Reversed.
Court: Federal Circuit, Judge: Stark, Filed On: May 2, 2024, Case #: 2022-2064, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
J. Starr finds that a case against technology company Huawei, whose products a communications company claims infringe on its patented process for routing cell phone calls to local numbers to avoid long distance charges, may proceed. The patent involves more than an abstract idea, it describes a specific process which constitutes a contribution to the technological field, so it is valid. Huawei’s motion to dismiss is denied.
Court: USDC Northern District of Texas , Judge: Starr, Filed On: April 30, 2024, Case #: 3:23cv151, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, patent, Technology
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Ericksen grants the Christmas tree patent claimant's motion for pre- and post-judgment interest but declines to enhance the jury's royalty damages award. The claimant has not definitively shown that its competitor's infringement on its patent was egregious, and a 10% statutory interest rate is appropriate to apply for pre-judgment interest, while the post-judgment interest rate will be the average 1-year Treasury yield for the week preceding entry of judgment.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Ericksen, Filed On: March 8, 2024, Case #: 0:15cv3443, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
Magistrate David declines to dismiss two claims concerning the assignment of a patent invented by an agent of a company that had been frozen out of the technology in favor of the co-inventor because the claims are not time-barred according to the pleadings.
Court: Delaware Chancery Court, Judge: David, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: 2022-0173-BWD, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
J. Rodriguez grants a stay in a dispute over U.S. Patent No. 11,401,779, entitled “Hydraulic Fracturing Plan and Execution of Same,” and U.S. Patent No. 11,560,770, because inter partes review is necessary to resolve the dispute.
Court: USDC Colorado, Judge: Rodriguez, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: 1:23cv1180, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
[Consolidated.] J. Reyna finds that the patent trial and appeal board improperly ruled in a patent dispute over a "system, method, and apparatus for just-in-time conditioning using a thermostat" because Google was not given an opportunity to address the claim construction.
Court: Federal Circuit, Judge: Reyna, Filed On: February 7, 2024, Case #: 2022-1750, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
J. Behm grants a manufacturer dismissal of patent infringement claims as moot concerning its “Electrostatically Charged Multi‐Acting Nasal Application, Product, and Method,” U.S. Patent No. 8,163,802, because the manufacturer stopped selling the disputed product.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Michigan, Judge: Behm, Filed On: February 2, 2024, Case #: 4:21cv10312, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
J. Robart orders a supplemental briefing on the manufacturer's motion to dismiss the metal supplier's complaint that the manufacturer infringed on the metal supplier's patents related to fire-blocking devices. The metal supplier seems to misunderstand the previous order to argue for the sufficiency of its patent allegations, so it has until Feb. 9, 2024 to file a supplemental brief addressing this. The manufacturer and its co-defendants may file an optional supplemental reply to that supplemental brief by no later than Feb. 16, 2024.
Court: USDC Western District of Washington, Judge: Robart, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: 2:23cv918, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, patent
J. Gilstrap rules in favor of the plaintiff company in finding it is not liable for breach of Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory licensing (FRAND) obligations as to the patents-in-suit based on the prior patent owner's conduct. The applicable French law does not "allow imputation of a prior patent owner’s conduct to a subsequent owner when determining if the subsequent owner has breached the FRAND commitment regarding standard essential patents." Though, the defendant company may present evidence of such conduct by the prior patent owner to defend against the willful infringement allegations.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Texas , Judge: Gilstrap, Filed On: January 8, 2024, Case #: 2:22cv78, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, International Law, patent
J. Mazzant partly grants the motion to dismiss for improper service as to the People's Republic of China defendants in a patent infringement suit, because the PRC is a signatory to the Hague Convention and does not permit service by mail. Though, the plaintiff company may execute alternative service on the PRC parties.
Court: USDC Eastern District of Texas , Judge: Mazzant, Filed On: November 9, 2023, Case #: 4:23cv420, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: civil Procedure, International Law, patent