May 3rd, 2010
Patent Term Extension
Food and Drug Administration
Federal Circuit
Wyeth Holdings Corp. v. Sec. of Health and Human Services
2009-1368
USDC District of Columbia
Had the district court erred by deferring to a Food and Drug Administration interpretation concerning the commencement date on which an animal drug sponsor had “initially submitted” a fast track application for agency approval under 21 U.S.C. § 360b(b) and thus triggered the end of the drug testing phase and the beginning of the drug approval phase for purposes of calculating patent term extension credits under 35 U.S.C. § 156(g)?
Download Stored Opinion
Tags: 21 USC 360b(b), 35 USC 156(g), Approval, Drug, FDA, Initially Submitted, Patent Term Extension, Testing
Posted in U.S. Patent | Comments Off
April 1st, 2010
This blog’s proprietor has been unable to publish recently due to his decision to accept the Nobel Prize in Mathematics for disproving the faux “solution” to Poincaré’s conjecture by that Russian showboat Grigory Perelman. The site intends to resume publication on World Maths Day 2010. Thank you for being patient.
Tags: April Fools' Day, Nasty Russian Mathematician, Nobel Prize in Mathematics, One Million Dollars, Winner
Posted in Site Notices and Announcements | Comments Off
March 15th, 2010
Illinois Deceptive Business Practices Act
Seventh Circuit
Kim v. Carter’s Inc.
09-2169, -2186
USDC ND Illinois
Defendant retailer was accused by putative class action plaintiffs of having violated the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, 815 ILCS 505/2, based upon allegations that defendant offers retail goods at an inflated retail price and then promises discounts to an actual retail price which is promoted as being “30% off,” and the question on review for purposes of 815 ILCS 505/2 was whether the district court erred in dismissing the case because plaintiffs were unable to show they had suffered “actual damage” as required to sustain their action?
Download Stored Opinion
Tags: 815 ILCS 505/2, Actual, Discounting, Illinois Deceptive Business Practices Act, Price, Promotional, Retail
Posted in Illinois Deceptive Business Practices Act | Comments Off
March 12th, 2010
Patent License
Federal Circuit
LabCorp v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.
2008-1597
USDC Colorado
Did the underlying lawsuit for breach of know-how and patent license agreement, and for patent infringement, present a “case within a case” controversy requiring disposition of substantive questions of patent law and thereby convey appellate jurisdiction to the Federal Circuit under 28 U.S.C. § 1338(a)? (J. Dyk dissent)
Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________
Tags: 1338, 28 USC, Breach, Case Within A Case, Infringement, Jurisdiction, License, Patent
Posted in Patent License | Comments Off
March 12th, 2010
Patent Infringement
Federal Circuit
Delaware Valley Floral Group, Inc. v. Superior Florals, Inc.
2009-1357
USDC SD Florida
Had the district court abused its discretion by ruling that the subject process patent was invalid pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) in view of contradictory testimony on the part of the inventor regarding the first date when the invention had been placed on-sale commercially, the court’s failure to consider the inventor’s errata sheet or declaration, and the inventor’s failure to dispute the invention was “ready for patenting” at the time of sale more than one year prior to the filing of the process patent application?
Download Stored Opinion
Tags: 102(b), 35 USC, Infringement, On-Sale, Patent, Ready for Patenting
Posted in U.S. Patent | Comments Off
March 11th, 2010
Patent Infringement
Federal Circuit
i4i Limited Partnership v. Microsoft Corporation
2009-1504
USDC ED Texas
Did the district court err in its claims construction, admission of evidence as to damages or grant of enhanced damages for willful infringement, and were the jury’s findings of patent validity and infringement sound?
Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________
Tags: Editor, Enhanced Damages, Evidence, i4i, Infringement, Jury, Microsoft, Patent, Validity, XML
Posted in U.S. Patent | Comments Off
March 11th, 2010
Patent
Federal Circuit
In re Arun Arora
2009-1506
Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences
On obviousness grounds, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences had affirmed a refusal to register certain method patent claims, thus, did the tribunal err in its review of prior art references?
Download Stored Opinion
Tags: Application, Claims, obvious, Obviousness, Patent, PHOSITA, Refusal, Register
Posted in U.S. Patent | Comments Off
March 10th, 2010
Patent License
Fifth Circuit
DuVal Wiedmann, LLC v. Inforocket.com, Inc.
2009-50787
USDC WD Texas
Concomitantly with a reexamination request, a patent licensee had provided notice to its licensor that the licensee was terminating the parties’ license agreement in keeping with Lear, Inc. v. Adkins, 395 U.S. 653 (1969); after a declaratory judgment regarding rights under the license agreement was obtained and licensor appealed to the Fifth Circuit, licensor sought to move its appeal to the Federal Circuit by claiming the appeal involved questions of substantive patent law and, therefore, the issue is whether transfer of the appeal is required under 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a) and 28 U.S.C. § 1338?
Download Stored Opinion
_____________________________________________________
Tags: 1295(a), 1338, 28 USC, 395 USC 653, Adkins, Lear, License, Licensee, Licensor, Patent, Reexamination
Posted in Patent License | Comments Off
March 10th, 2010
Design Patent Infringement
Federal Circuit
Richardson v. Stanley Works, Inc.
2009-1354
USDC Arizona
FUBAR? – Had the district court erred by refusing plaintiff design patentee a jury trial, determining there was no infringement, and construing the claims of the asserted design patent when the court had separated the considerable functional aspects of the asserted design from the ornamental aspects given Egyptian Goddess, Inc. v. Swisa, Inc., 543 F.3d 665 (Fed. Cir. 2008) and where the subject matter in question comprised the competing hand tools STEPCLAW for plaintiff and FUBAR for defendant as depicted below?
STEPCLAW
FUBAR
Download Stored Opinion
Tags: Design, Design Patent, Egyptian Goddess, Functional, Infringement, Ornamental, Tool
Posted in Design Patent | Comments Off
March 10th, 2010
Patent Infringement
Federal Circuit
Ajinomoto Co., Inc. v. International Trade Commission
2009-1081
United States International Trade Commission
Had the tribunal committed error in determining that the importation and sale of certain lysine feed products did not violate 19 U.S.C. § 1337 and that the claims of the United States patents asserted in the action were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 1 for failure to comply with the best mode requirement or unenforceable due to inequitable conduct where the patent holder had failed to disclose information regarding pertinent genetic materials?
Download Stored Opinion
Tags: 19 USC 1337, 35 USC 112, Best Mode, Inequitable Conduct, International Trade Commission, ITC Action, Patent
Posted in U.S. Patent | Comments Off