BMC and Muniauction Still Require a Single Actor for Direct Infringement

The Federal Circuit has refused to find direct patent infringement where a single party did not carry out, or at least control, all acts alleged to constitute infringement.  Voter Verified, Inc. v. Premier Election Solutions, Inc., Nos. 2011-1553, 2012-1017, 2011-1559, 2012-1016 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 5, 2012). Perhaps this holding should not be surprising.  However, the […]

Read full story

Unindexed Internet Content Can Be a “Printed Publication” under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)

Unindexed Internet content can be a “printed publication” under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), the Federal Circuit has held.  Voter Verified, Inc. v. Premier Election Solutions, Inc., Nos. 2011-1553, 2012-1017, 2011-1559, 2012-1016 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 5, 2012). Claim 49 of U.S. Reissue Patent RE40,449 recited “[a] method of voting providing for self-verification of a ballot.” The District Court […]

Read full story

Akamai Forces Reconsideration of Summary Judgment of No Induced Infringement

Having previously granted summary judgment of non-infringement on the plaintiff’s induced infringement claim because no one actor practiced the allegedly infringed claims, the court in Civix-DDI, LLC v. Hotels.com, LP, No. 05 C 6869 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 1, 2012), has now granted a request for reconsideration in light of the Federal Circuit’s en banc decision […]

Read full story

Patent Complaint Fails Form 18 Pleading Standard

Two different district judges have dismissed the same patent plaintiff’s complaint (with leave to amend) where the complaint failed to identify accused products or link them to patent claims. PB&J Software, LLC v. BackupAgent B.V., No. 4:12CV691 CDP (E.D. Mo. Oct. 15, 2012). The court first explained that, as the Federal Circuit set forth in […]

Read full story

Path Cleared for Ninth Circuit to Address Copyright First Sale Doctrine Burdens of Proof

Adobe has been granted partial judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) in a copyright infringement case so that the Ninth Circuit may determine which party bears the burden of proof when the first sale doctrine is raised as a defense to copyright infringement. Adobe Systems, Inc. v. Christenson, No. 2:10-CV-00422-LRH-GWF (D. Nev. Oct. […]

Read full story

Hi-Jacked LinkedIn Account Doesn’t Cause “Loss” Under the CFAA

A plaintiff’s claim under the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1030(a)(2)(C) and 1030(a)(5)(C), based on her ex-employer’s alleged hi-jacking of her LinkedIn account, has failed to survive the defendant’s motion for summary judgment because the plaintiff failed to show a “loss” under the CFAA.  Eagle v. Morgan, No. 11-4303 (E.D. Pa. Oct. […]

Read full story

Breach of Duty to Offer RAND Licensing Terms?

A lawsuit brought against a patent owner based on an alleged failure to offer a patent license on reasonable and nondiscriminatory (RAND) terms has largely survived the patent owner’s motion to dismiss.  Realtek Semiconductor Corp. v. LSI Corp., No. C-12-03451 RMW (N.D. Cal. Oct. 10, 2012). The defendants, who contended that the patents at issue […]

Read full story

En Banc Fed. Cir. To Reconsider Computer-Implemented Inventions

Vacating a 2-1 panel decision that had held software-implemented business method claims patentable, the Federal Circuit has now ordered an en banc rehearing of the patent owner’s appeal of the district court’s judgment that patent claims were invalid. In its order in  CLS Bank Int’l. v. Alice Corp., No. 2011-1301 (Fed. Cir. October 9, 2012), the Court […]

Read full story

Estoppel and Inter Partes Review of Patent Validity

Do the estoppel provisions of the inter partes re-examination statute preclude a third party from relying on prior art in litigation where, after the third party has included the prior art in its request for inter partes re-examination, the USPTO has determined that the prior art does not present a substantial new question of patentability? […]

Read full story

E.D. Texas Awards Enhanced Damages for Willful Infringement

Listing an infringed patent in two contracts, and the apparent awareness of a Citrix executive of the patent, was enough to justify a finding of willfulness and enhanced damages against Citrix.  SSL Services, LLC v. Citrix Systems, Inc., No. 2:08-cv-158-JRG (E.D. Tex. Sept. 17, 2012).  Before the jury was charged, the court had issued a […]

Read full story