Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.—which had successfully petitioned for IPR—withdrew from the case after Huawei filed its appeal, but the U.S. government intervened to defend the PTAB’s decision.…
The PTAB did not establish the existence of a motivation for a person of ordinary skill in the art to combine the aspects of existing patents and prior art.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal…
In the United States, a judge may increase the damages for patent infringement up to threefold[1] resulting in awards of millions, or even billons, of dollars. In 2016, the Supreme Court, in Halo…
Holding bench trial instead of jury trial deprived SEP owner Ericsson of Seventh Amendment rights because trial was held to determine compensatory relief for mobile device maker TCL’s past…
Three PTAB decisions were decided by APJs invalidly appointed, but two Circuit Judges would find the defect wholly cured by Federal Circuit’s recent Arthrex decision.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for…
A jury’s verdict that snowmobile frame patents asserted against Arctic Cat were indefinite and invalid as anticipated or obvious was supported by substantial evidence.
A federal district court…
The Board properly found that a person skilled in the art would not be motivated to combine two prior art references and that industry praise supported a finding of nonbviousness.
Substantial…
The PTAB improperly found that the patent is unpatentable in view of the prior art.
Concluding that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board improperly construed certain claims in a patent for memory system…
Board’s obviousness finding was predicated on erroneous finding that claim term "mechanical control assembly" was not a means-plus-function term.
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in finding…
Since the U.S. Supreme Court last year in Oil States rejected a constitutional challenge to the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s authority to invalidate patents in post-grant reviews, patent owners…
