• Halo v. Pulse: CAFC Dismisses Premature Appeal of Pending Judgment Interest Award

    The Court first addressed whether the district court’s decision awarding Halo pre- and post-judgment interest and ordering the parties to either file a stipulation on the amount of interest or file briefs explaining their positions constituted a “final decision” appealable under § 1295(a)(1). The Court noted that the district court had not resolved the parties’ dispute on the calculation of pre- and post-judgment interest before Pulse appealed. As a result and based on Supreme Court precedent,…

    Continue Reading ...
  • BlackBerry settles arbitration with Qualcomm, will receive $940 million for contract dispute over patent royalties

    BlackBerry Ltd (NASDAQ:BBRY) announced that it had reached an agreement with San Diego, CA-based semiconductor designer Qualcomm, Inc. (NASDAQ:QCOM) to resolve arbitration proceedings over tech royalty payments made between the companies. Terms of the agreement involve Qualcomm paying BlackBerry a total of $940 million to account for net royalties due to BlackBerry during 2016’s calendar year and 2017’s first quarter. The announcement indicates that the payment were to be made before or on May…

    Continue Reading ...
  • BMW, Volvo, Juniper Networks among first to cite TC Heartland in motions to dismiss

    On Tuesday, May 30th, online legal news outlet Law360 reported that a trio of major automakers filed a motion asking a federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (E.D. Tex.) to toss a patent infringement suit filed last May by Longview, TX-based patent licensing firm Stragent LLC. Reportedly, the automaker defendants argue that the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group forecloses the case from being decided in E.D. Tex.

    The…

    Continue Reading ...
  • AT THE TIME OF

                            目次はこちら

    AT THE TIME OF

    $$ A 12-byte value which defines the spatial co-ordinates at the time of Content Unit creation. (USP7260304)

    $$ At the time of writing, there is a trend towards providing passenger seats in which the back-rest and leg-rest can be maneuvered to form a substantially flat surface with the seat pan on which a passenger can lie down for sleeping. (USP6276635)

    $$ In practice, a threshold is determined at the time of recall for each CMM that returns k or more bits set to one, to implement k-point thresholding. (USP7065517)

    $$ The output may be visual or audible, for example at the time of testing, or the results may be output as data, for later evaluation. (USP6697742)

    $$ Its purpose is to allow different code to be included in the program depending on the situation at the time of compilation. (USP6691301)

    $$ A masking agent is most effective at the time of application. (USP6631722)

    $$ The subset S2 detect the new channel allocation and retune to the traffic channel T1 at the time of changeover. (USP6600757)

    $$ Thus, at the time of transition, the observer is looking at the building with the sign "XYZ" in the first scene. (USP6327381)

                            目次はこちら

    Continue Reading ...
  • #AliceStorm: April Update and the Impact of TC Heartland on Patent Eligibility

    The Supreme Court’s recent decision on patent venue, TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, may actually turn out to be a good thing for patentees when it comes to Section 101. But before we get to that, let’s do the AliceStorm numbers: The overall Alicestorm index of percentage of Section 101 ineligibility outcomes in the federal courts is up 0.6% from March, at 67.6%. The Federal Circuit contributed the most to the increase, issuing eight separate decisions finding patent eligible subject matter, with six of these decisions being Rule 36 affirmances. The number of motions on the pleadings…

    Continue Reading ...
  • How will district courts handle the influx of motions after SCOTUS TC Heartland ruling?

    “What we do know is that motion practice will heat up and courts must determine how they want to handle the influx of motions to dismiss and related challenges with no clear instruction from TC Heartland,” Storm said. “Many defendants will likely move to dismiss or transfer venue, and for the latter, may take the step to proactively file in their chosen jurisdiction and then request transfer to such jurisdiction.”

    The post How will district courts handle the influx of motions after SCOTUS TC…

    Continue Reading ...
  • Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Inc.: will International Patent Exhaustion bring Free Trade in Patented Goods?

    Guest post by Professor Sarah R. Wasserman Rajec* In Impression Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Inc., decided Tuesday, the Supreme Court held that the authorized sale of a patented product, anywhere in the world, exhausts the patent-holder’s rights in that product. The Court overturned Federal Circuit case law holding that post-sale restrictions and foreign sales preserve […]

    Continue Reading ...
  • CAFC discusses § 1447(d) in Preston v. Nagel

    Of relevance:


    Recognizing that § 1447(d) would ordinarily bar re-
    viewability here, Nagel
    asks us to hold that an exception exists
    “where, as here, defendants invoked
    § 1454 to
    remove patent claims over which federal courts have
    exclusive jurisdiction.” Appellants’ Br. at 17. In support,
    Nagel relies on
    Osborn v. Haley, 549 U.S. 225 (2007), to
    argue that the America In
    vents Act (AIA) overrides § 1447(d)’s bar.

    We disagree.

    (…)
    Nagel argues that the “Holmes Group fix” created the
    one-way “intercourt shuttle” that Osborn
    described.

    link: http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/16-1524.Opinion.5-30-2017.1.PDF

    Continue Reading ...
  • Spotify reaches $43.5M settlement over class action suit on unpaid royalties for copyrighted songs

    The $43.5 million from the recent Spotify settlement will reportedly go towards a separate fund to compensate publishers and songwriters. Such payments made by Spotify and other streaming services to copyright owners are known as mechanical royalties. Mechanical royalties are usually paid when a copy of a song is made, such as when a music publisher creates a CD containing copyright-protected songs. Although Spotify doesn’t sell or distribute physical media, it does owe mechanical royalties…

    Continue Reading ...