Print Page

Intellectual Property News

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. - §101 patent eligible

On January 25, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the Federal Circuit”) released its opinion in Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc., affirming the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas decisions: (1) to deny summary judgment that four claims from Core Wireless’ patents are directed to patent ineligible subject matter; (2) to deny judgment as a matter of law that another patent anticipates the asserted claims; and (3) to deny judgment as a matter of law that the asserted claims are not infringed.

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

On February 14, 2018, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“the Federal Circuit”) found in Aatrix Software, Inc. v. Green Shades Software, Inc. that Aatrix Software, Inc. (“Aatrix”) was entitled to file its proposed second amended complaint, holding that the District Court erred to the extent it granted the motion to dismiss filed by Green Shades Software, Inc. (“Green Shades”).

Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc. – Computer software for identifying and protecting against malware §101 patent eligible

On January 10, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) upheld the patentability of multiple patents under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (”§ 101”) in Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc., but reversing on both infringement counts of two patents and one of the two patents’ damage amounts for failure to apportion.

Advanced Video Tech v. HTC Corp. – Co-inventor did not transfer interests in patent via employment agreement

On January 11, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) issued its opinion in Advanced Video Technologies LLC v. HTC Corp., holding that a co-inventor of a patent does not transfer ownership interests in the patent under a California employment agreement that includes a “will assign” provision, a trust assignment provision, and a quitclaim assignment provision.

◄◄ ◄ 6 7 8 9 10 ► ►►

Intellectual Property News

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. - §101 patent eligible

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc.

Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems, Inc. – Computer software for identifying and protecting against malware §101 patent eligible

Advanced Video Tech v. HTC Corp. – Co-inventor did not transfer interests in patent via employment agreement

Categories

Archives

STAAS & HALSEY LLP

Privacy Notification