Patent Law Weblog
recent posts
- PTAB (Again) Awards Priority of Invention to Broad in Interference No. 106,115
- Argentina Repeals Pharmaceutical Patent Examination Guidelines
- USPTO Moves to Protect Design Rights for Digital Innovations
- Judicial Conduct and Disability Committee Has Its Say, Denies Judge Newman’s Latest Request for Review
- PTAB Issues Judgment on Priority in CRISPR Interference
about
Category: District Court
-
Message Exchange Patent Held Invalid under Section 101 By Joseph Herndon — Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC ("MTel") sued United Parcel Service, Inc. ("UPS") in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,786,748. After several years of litigation, UPS filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, arguing…
-
By Joseph Herndon — Plaintiff CG Technology Development, LLC sued Defendants Bwin.Party Digital Entertainment, PLC in the U.S. District Court for the District of Nevada for infringement of various patents via operation of various online casino games. Bwin filed a motion to dismiss infringement as to U.S. Patents 8,771,058; 8,814,664; 9,355,518; and 9,306,952 based on…
-
By Joseph Herndon — In the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, in a case captioned Perdiemco, LLC. v. Industrack LLC, the Court found some patents having method claims directed to "conveying user location" to be patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Much of the reasoning was based on the recent Federal…
-
By Kevin E. Noonan — The intersection of patent law, drug regulations, creative lawyering, and commerce (if not outright greed) has once again arisen in a qui tam suit brought under 31 U.S.C. §§ 3729–3733 (alleging fraud against the U.S. Government) by Lower Drug Prices for Consumers (LDPFC), reportedly an arm of Foxhill Capital, in…
-
By Michael Borella and Eddie Obissi — Anecdotally, there seems to be a loosening up regarding the application of § 101 by the District Courts. The 2014 Supreme Court decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l has been referred to as sounding a death knell for software and business method patents, and (less hyperbolically) as…
-
"Computer Display System" Patent Found Invalid under § 101 By Joseph Herndon — Tridim Innovations LLC sued Amazon.com, Inc. for patent infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,838,326 and 5,847,709 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Amazon moved to dismiss TriDim's claims for invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The District…
-
By Michael Borella — Iron Gate, holder of U.S. Patent No. 7,203,693, sued Lowe's in the Southern District of New York, alleging infringement. Lowe's moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), contending that the claims of the patent failed to meet the patent-eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101. Claim 1 of the patent recites: A…
-
Software Patent Found to Be Directed to Abstract Idea, But Survives § 101 Challenge with Inventive Concept By Joseph Herndon — Bruce Zak, an individual, sued Facebook, Inc. for patent infringement in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan on two of his software patents — United States Patent Nos. 8,713,134 and…
-
Magistrate Recommends That Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Be Allowed for Kit Claims and Denied for Method Claims By Donald Zuhn — Last month, in Oxford Immunotec Ltd. v. Qiagen, Inc., Magistrate Judge Donald L. Cabell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts issued a report and recommendation that the joint motion to…
-
By Michael Borella — Core Wireless Licensing brought an action against LG Electronics in the Eastern District of Texas. Core contended that LG infringed claim 21 of its U.S. Patent No. 7,804,850. LG moved for summary judgment on the grounds that the claim was invalid under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101 and 112. The claim recites:…
Patent Docs 