One-Year Clock for Filing IPR Petition Applies to Litigants and Parties That...
POWER INTEGRATIONS, INC v. SEMICONDUCTOR COMPONENTSBefore Prost, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.Summary: An IPR is time-barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) if, at the time...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Patent Proposal Could Help EEs | EE Times
Partner Mauricio Uribe authored "Patent Proposal Could Help EEs," which was published on the EE Times website. Excerpt: The U.S. Congress is considering legislation on what is eligible for a patent,...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Plausible and Specific Factual Allegations That Aspects of a Claim Are...
CELLSPIN SOFT, INC. V. FITBIT, INC. ET AL.Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.Summary: While not all factual...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Partner Bridget Smith was quoted in "Uniclass Didn’t Infringe Computer System...
Partner Bridget Smith was quoted in "Uniclass Didn’t Infringe Computer System Patents, Court Says (1)," an article published by Bloomberg Law.Excerpt: Substantial evidence supported a jury’s nding that...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Amended Complaint May Relate Back to Original Complaint Despite Asserting...
ANZA TECHNOLOGY, INC. v. MUSHKIN, INC.Before Prost, Newman, and Bryson. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado.Summary: Patent infringement claims in an amended...
View ArticleClik here to view.
Nexus Analysis May Be Based on Novel Combination of Known Elements Considered...
HENNY PENNY CORPORATION v. FRYMASTER LLCBefore Lourie, Chen, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office.Summary: With respect to secondary considerations of nonobviousness,...
View Article