Entries by PatentAttorney.com

Don’t Sell This IPR Strategy Short

Recognized for his business acumen when predicting the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis, hedge fund manager J. Kyle Bass is now attempting to capitalize on the pro-petitioner tendencies of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), notoriously dubbed the patent “death squad.” Earlier this year, Bass founded the Coalition for Affordable Drugs to target patents that […]

The Supreme Court rules that patent licensing beyond its terms is anti-competitive

In, Kimble v. Marvel, The Supreme Court considered anti-competitive concerns to patent licensing contracts beyond the term of a patent. Stated another way the case is about post-expiration patent royalties. The US has had a longstanding ban on such royalties, as a result of the holding in Brulotte v. Thys Co., that identified them as […]

The Supreme Court rules that Belief in Invalidity is Not a Defense to Induced Infringement

In Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that a defendant may not assert a good-faith belief in a patent’s invalidity as a defense against liability for inducing infringement. Inducement requires not just knowledge of the patent-in-suit, but also knowledge that the induced acts are infringing. Because infringement and validity […]

Federal Circuit issues clarifying opinion on Definiteness vs Indefiniteness test

The Federal Circuit recently clarified its interpretation of a major Supreme Court case involving the standard of definiteness and when a patent may be determined indefinite. Previously the Federal Circuit has held that a claim is indefinite “only when it is ‘not amenable to construction’ or ‘insolubly ambiguous.’”  In Biosig Instruments, Inc. v. Nautilus, Inc. […]

Federal Circuit issues clarifying opinion on Direct Infringement vs. Induced Infringement

The Federal Circuit recently clarified its interpretation of a major Supreme Court case involving direct infringement. In Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks the Federal Circuit issued a new opinion that said direct infringement of a method claim “exists when all of the steps of the claim are performed by or attributed to a single […]

Important Trademark Decision May have Implications for Patent Law

In B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, the U.S. Supreme Court held that a decision from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) can prevent a district court from re-judging issues that have already been decided by the TTAB’s decision, if the “ordinary elements” of issue preclusion are met. This is despite the fact that the […]