In WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp, decided today, the U.S. Supreme Court held that 35 U.S.C. Sections 271(f)(2) and 284 allow a patent owner to recover damages in the form of a reasonable royalty and lost foreign profits for patent infringement. In this case, the defendant manufactured the components in the United States, but then shipped those components...
Continue ReadingDomestic companies incorporated in the state of Texas (and other multi-judicial district states) accused of patent infringement have an additional tool in their venue arsenal. The Federal Circuit ruled last week in In re BigCommerce that a domestic company incorporated in a state having multiple judicial districts (such as Texas) resides for purposes of the patent venue statute only...
Continue ReadingSubsequent to the Supreme Court’s ruling in TC Heartland, some foreign corporations were advancing the contention that the venue for patent infringement lawsuits naming them as a defendant was not proper in any court in the United States. Today, the Federal Circuit addressed that contention in In re HTC Corporation, ruling that foreign corporations are subject to suit in...
Continue ReadingThe Federal Circuit’s opinion in Disc Disease Solutions Inc. v. VGH Solutions, Inc. et. al., handed down on May 1, 2018, may very well change the specificity that patent owners and patent attorneys provide in filing a lawsuit to enforce their intellectual property rights. It suggests that, at least for simple technology, there is not much difference, if any,...
Continue ReadingThe Federal Circuit recently handed down two decisions that give guidance to patent owners contemplating patent litigation in the post-Alice world. The first was Berkheimer v. HP Inc. which was decided on February 8, 2018. Berkheimer was an appeal from the Northern District of Illinois court granting summary judgment in favor of the accused infringer, in part, that claims were patent-ineligible under...
Continue ReadingIn its September 24, 2018 opinion in Intellectual Ventures v. Sprint, et. al., the Eastern District of Texas Court made several rulings that touch on a number of issues that patent owners and parties defending patent infringement allegations should consider. This opinion was the result of two identical Section 101 Motions to Dismiss filed in two companion cases involving...
Continue ReadingEarlier this year, the Supreme Court addressed the on-sale provision of the AIA, 35 U.S.C. Sec 102(a), in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. In this case, the patent owner, Helsinn, entered into a license agreement and a supply and purchase agreement with a third party. These agreements gave the third party the right to distribute, promote, market,...
Continue ReadingThe Federal Circuit recently affirmed the dismissal of the patent owner’s lawsuit brought for patent infringement under the doctrine of equivalents in Amgen Inc. v. Coherus Biosciences Inc., 2018-1993 (Fed. Cir. July 29, 2019). The case illustrates one of the potential difficulties a patent owner may encounter under the doctrine of equivalents. Prosecution history estoppel is a defense to...
Continue Reading