March 10, 2010
i4i Review Redux
Microsoft
has prevailed upon the CAFC to rehear, en banc, only the willfulness portion of
its affirmation of the district court ruling in i4i v. Microsoft. In
other words, the CAFC cut Microsoft a break, probably because the CAFC wants
another bite at cleaning up the willfulness standard. A revised CAFC ruling was
issued today that takes out the sentence: "Microsoft does not challenge the jury
instructions on willfulness or the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the
jury's willfulness finding," and adds a section on willfulness to its revised
ruling.
Continue reading "i4i Review Redux"
Posted by Patent Hawk at 5:54 PM | Infringement | Comments (0)
February 27, 2010
Static
Trading
Technologies sued eSpeed and Ecco for infringing
6,772,132 &
6,766,304, which go to displaying "static price levels" on a computerized
board for commodity trading. One service product infringed, but others literally did not, and applying the
doctrine of equivalents was proscribed. Defenses to
indefiniteness and inequitable conduct went nowhere, as did on-sale bar (§
102(b)) based on a provisional priority date. Affirmation on appeal toted up
dynamic case law quotes, not on sale, but ones that litigators must buy.
Posted by Patent Hawk at 4:59 PM | Claim Construction | Comments (3)
February 7, 2010
Deep Fryer
SEB
sued Montgomery Ward and others for infringing
4,995,312 by selling a cheap deep fryer manufactured by Pentalpha. Speedy
justice meant that getting to trial took a mere seven years, whereupon a jury
found willful infringement, awarding $4.65 million in damages, which the
district court judge hence cut by $2 million. The district court had awarded
enhanced damages and attorneys' fees to SEB, but then snatched them back in
light of the 2007 CAFC
Seagate ruling that willfully gutted willfulness. Herein, a tale of
disingenuity, and an appeal decision greasing understanding of inducing
infringement.
Posted by Patent Hawk at 1:29 PM | Infringement | Comments (1)
January 15, 2010
Going Up
5,689,094
claims personal recognition that tells an elevator where to go. Patent owner
Schindler Elevator tried to get a lift over Otis Elevator, but Otis got a
summary judgment of noninfringement by construction of claim, which was a shame,
because, on appeal, the district court took the blame. The CAFC told the
district court where to go, while leaving the final destination indefinite.
Posted by Patent Hawk at 10:32 PM | Claim Construction | Comments (0)
January 9, 2010
Unfried Chicken
Restaurant
Technologies (RTI) sued Jersey Shore Chicken for infringing
5,249,511, which claims a system for supplying and disposing of cooking oil
in restaurant fryers. If RTI had a good prosecutor, the patent wouldn't have
read like a product manual, with too few embodiments, especially for
means-plus-function claims. Herein, RTI gets fried pursuing denial to a bitter
end.
Continue reading "Unfried Chicken"
Posted by Patent Hawk at 11:12 PM | Infringement | Comments (0)
December 22, 2009
Unpreserved
i4i sued Microsoft for a pissant feature in Word: editing custom XML.
But to i4i's business, the feature was puissant. A seven-day trial found
Microsoft willfully infringing a valid patent, with a jury award of $200
million. "Although statutorily authorized to triple the jury's damages award
because of Microsoft's willful infringement, the district court awarded only $40
million in additional damages. It also granted i4i's motion for a permanent
injunction." The inevitable appeal, widely expected to go more Microsoft's way
than not, did not. Procedural fumbling by supposedly the best lawyers money can
buy sold Microsoft short. Herein, CAFC case law heavy on burden and sufficiency,
in a case practically covering the gauntlet of patent enforcement.
Continue reading "Unpreserved"
Posted by Patent Hawk at 8:57 PM | Case Law | Comments (1)
December 16, 2009
Expert?
Experts
are the litigation equivalent of hired guns. They are only as good as the
guidance given by the attorneys providing their payday on what bullets to shoot
where. A case in point is Intellectual Science and Technology v. Sony.
5,748,575, one of five patents left standing on appeal, claims concurrent
reading of computer CDs. The district court pitched the case on summary judgment
for non-infringement after the plaintiff's expert failed to convince, as his declaration
was "merely conclusory." The appeals court gave a lesson in how an expert ought to spurt.
Posted by Patent Hawk at 12:36 AM | Infringement | Comments (1)
December 13, 2009
So Unlike Concrete
In
an extremely messy patent case involving claim construction (and correction),
noninfringement, invalidity, laches, indefiniteness, trade secrets, and topped
with several business torts, Ultimax Cement had its quick-set concrete patents
crumble by a sledgehammer summary judgment at district court, and so Ultimax
sought repair at the CAFC. The foundation of the patent problem: lack of careful
proofreading by the prosecutor.
Continue reading "So Unlike Concrete"
Posted by Patent Hawk at 1:04 AM | Claim Construction | Comments (3)
December 8, 2009
Actually Factual
Source
Search Technologies (SST) sued LendingTree over
5,758,328, which claims an online vending system employing request for quote
(RFQ) posting to select potential vendors, to which the vendors respond. "The
'328 patent claims to solve the "too much" or "too little" information problem
commonly associated with running searches over a network or system." The
asserted claims were found infringed but obvious, thus invalid, in summary
judgment. The appeal, narrowed to a single claim (14), let the CAFC panel
reiterate its caution to district courts: be not hasty in granting summary
judgment if the scent of "genuine issues of material fact" is in the air.
Continue reading "Actually Factual"
Posted by Patent Hawk at 5:26 PM | Infringement | Comments (1)
Newsfeed (RSS)
Recommended:
Recommended:
Recommended: