Archive | Litigation RSS feed for this section

Customer Suits Alone Do Not Confer Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction

DataTern, Inc. sued Microsoft’s and SAP’s customers alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,937,402 and 6,101,502.  Microsoft and SAP then brought actions against DataTern seeking declaratory judgments of non-infringement.  The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s finding that it had jurisdiction over all claims except Microsoft’s claims against the ’402 patent, because DataTern’s claim charts […]

Read full story

Writ of Mandamus in Patent Infringement Venue Transfer Motion

AVS sued Toyota and Gulf States—a Texas-based Toyota dealer—for patent infringement in the Eastern District of Texas.  Toyota and Gulf States filed a motion (1) to sever the claims against Gulf States; (2) to transfer the claims against Toyota to a more convenient forum under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a); and (3) to stay the claims […]

Read full story

Fee Award Under 35 U.S.C. § 285 Supported by Evidence of Subjective Bad Faith and Objective Baselessness

Awards of attorneys fees under 35 U.S.C § 285 may seem difficult to obtain, given the dual requirement of proving a party’s subjective bad faith, as well as the objective baselessness of its position.  However, as demonstrated in Gabriel Technologies Corp. v.  Qualcomm Inc., No. 2013-1205 (Mar. 18, 2014), some conduct is so egregious that […]

Read full story

Common Meaning Given to Claim Language Using Terms of Art

A question of infringement turned on the meaning of “gateway” in the phrase “intelligent gateway” in a patent claim.  The Federal Circuit agreed that a district court was entitled to consult technical dictionaries and use commonly understood meanings of the word to construe the claim.  Accordingly, the court affirmed the district court’s claim construction, and […]

Read full story

When are Hardware AND Software Required to Infringe Patent Claims?

A district court properly construed patent claims as requiring both hardware and software, and properly granted summary judgment of non-infringement where the defendants’ products used  potentially infringing hardware, but did not license or use software that would have been necessary to complete the infringement.  Nazomi Communications, Inc. v. Nokia Corp., No. 2013-1165 (Fed. Cir. Jan. […]

Read full story

Another Rule 12 Holding that Patent Claims Are Invalid Under Section 101

A district court has held invalid patent claims directed to “facilitating evaluation, in connection with the procurement or delivery of products or services, in a context of at least one of (i) a financial transaction and (ii) operation of an enterprise.”  Lumen View Technology LLC v. Findthebest.com, Inc., No. 13 CIV. 3599 (DLC) (S.D.N.Y. Nov. […]

Read full story

Claims Directed to Controlling a Multiple-Computer System Held Not Patent-Eligible

A Rule 12b(b)(6) motion alleging a failure to assert infringement of patentable subject matter has been granted where the asserted patent claimed a method for triggering an event in a system that includes multiple computers.  UbiComm, LLC v. Zappos IP, Inc., Civil Action No. 13-1029-RGA (D. Del. Nov. 13, 2013). The only independent claim of […]

Read full story

Pleading Indirect and Willful Patent Infringement Requires Specific Allegations

Claims for induced, contributory, and willful patent infringement were dismissed (without prejudice) because the plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to support its claims.  Unisone Strategic IP, Inc. v. Life Techs. Corp., No. 3:13-cv-1278-GPC-JMA (S.D. Cal. Oct. 22, 2013).  The plaintiff had alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,996,538, directed to “[a] system and method […]

Read full story

When Can a Patent Plaintiff Amend Infringement Contentions?

Where a plaintiff demonstrated that it could not have known of certain alleged bases for infringement prior to inspecting a defendant’s source code, the court allowed the plaintiff to add certain claims to its infringement contentions.  United States Ethernet Innovations v. Acer, Inc., No. C 10-3724 CW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 11, 2013). Intel had intervened […]

Read full story

Attorney General Ordered Enjoined from Issuing Order to Cease and Desist Filing Patent Lawsuits

Holding that a patent owner had standing to contest a cease and desist order directed to its counsel, the U.S. District Court in Nebraska has entered a preliminary injunction prohibiting the Nebraska Attorney General from enforcing that cease and desist order. Activision TV, Inc. v. Pinnacle Bancorp, Inc., No. 8:13CV215 (D. Neb. Sept. 30, 2013). […]

Read full story