2012
En Banc Federal Circuit To Tackle Patent–eligibility of Computer–implemented Inventions
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsNo matter the end result, the Federal Circuit continues to demonstrate a willingness to take on the hard questions, even if it can’t promise to speak with one voice in answering them. Today, the court ordered en banc review in the case of CLS Bank v. Alice Corporation. It asked the parties, the Patent Office,...
Read More2012
ITC Proposes New Discovery Rules—Faster, Cheaper, Better?
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsThe International Trade Commission has become a hotspot for patent disputes with an international flavor. Specifically, the ITC has the power to block the importation of products into the country that infringe asserted patents. So the ITC offers another venue in which the infringement and validity of U.S. patents can be litigated. Given that products...
Read More2012
Stream of Consciousness re Stream of Commerce
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsOur thanks to Docket Navigator for calling our attention to a brief order out of the Central District of California, related to the improper joinder of two parties. By way of review, prior to the America Invents Act, some courts took a liberal view of what constitutes the same “transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions...
Read More2012
Points to Ponder from Posner
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsOne doesn’t often have the opportunity to hear a judge’s thoughts on a substantive topic of law in an unfiltered manner—or at least outside the relatively–strict confines of a judicial opinion or order. Which is why we at IP Wise are very interested in Judge Posner’s occasional blog posts, for any insights it might provide....
Read More2012
Patent Trial and Appeal Board Will Consider Patent Eligibility Challenges
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsWe wrote recently about a legal theory being tested in federal court that an accused infringer may not have the right to challenge the validity of a patent in a lawsuit on the ground that the invention was not eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101. That would leave the district courts unable...
Read More2012
Only You Can Prevent Bad Patents
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsAs one of the legacies of patent reform, third parties are now permitted to submit relevant materials to patent examiners in any given examination. As noted in the USPTO’s recent press release encouraging participation, “[s]ubmission of proposed prior art helps examiners determine whether the innovation in the application is patentable:” By introducing third party input...
Read More2012
Burden-Switching: Patent Licensee Must Prove Non–infringement
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsPatent disputes may feel never–ending. In some cases, such as this one, even a patent license isn’t the end of the story. Medical device manufacturer Medtronic entered a license agreement to resolve a dispute with the owner of a patent to a cardiac resynchronization therapy device. Under the terms of the agreement, Medtronic retained the right...
Read More2012
Pulling The Rug Out
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsWe’re patently fascinated by Patently–O’s recent debate as to whether subject matter eligibility under Section 101 of the Patent Act (i.e. whether the subject matter of a proposed invention is even susceptible to patent protection or not) is a proper defense in patent litigation, since the Patent Act seems to omit it from the list...
Read More2012
One Rule for Plaintiffs, Another for Defendants in Patent Pleading
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsAs we reported in June, the Federal Circuit decided in In re Bill of Lading Transmission and Processing Systems Patent Litigations that the bare–bones patent complaint set out in Form 18 to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure is enough to state a claim of direct patent infringement even though such a complaint wouldn’t pass...
Read More2012
Congressional Troll Study
David Swetnam-Burland / 0 CommentsThe Congressional Research Service recently released a twenty–page report on patent assertion entities/non–practicing entities/patent trolls. Worth a more thorough analysis than this blog will offer, we note that the mere fact that Congress commissioned such a report demonstrates some not insignificant interest about this corner of the patent litigation world—and the fact that the report...
Read More