Computer-Aided Clearinghouse Is Not Patent Eligible Subject Matter
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (”Federal Circuit”) has held that a computer aided method of managing a credit application, by receiving data, sending credit data and forwarding funding...
View ArticleLiability For Inducing Patent Infringement Arises Only With Proof Of Direct...
The U.S. Supreme Court held in Limelight Networks Inc. v. Akamai Technologies Inc., Case No. 12-786 (June 2, 2014) (available here) that a defendant can only be held liable for inducing infringement of...
View ArticleWilliamson v Citrix: Functional Language Without Structural Meaning in System...
The Patent Appeals court, in an en banc decision, reversed decades of precedent and held that section 112(f) of the Patent Statute, which concerns “means plus function” MPF language should apply to...
View ArticleReissue Amendments may be Determined to be Too Broad if they Contradict...
In Arcelormittal France et al. v. AK Steel Corporation, et al., 2014-1189, 1190, 1191 (Fed.Cir. 2015) (Available Here), the Federal Circuit affirmed several of the reissue claims were invalid as being...
View ArticlePatent Claim Construction: Beyond Plain Meaning into Contextual Considerations
In Atlas IP, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc, No. 2012-1071, 2015-1105 (Fed. Cir. October 2015), the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that where the claim language did not have a...
View ArticleFed. Cir. Affirms Denial of Motion to Amend During IPR
In Prolitec, Inc. v. Scentair Technologies, Inc. 2015-1020 (Fed. Cir. December 2015) (Available Here), the Federal Circuit affirmed the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Trial and Appeal...
View ArticleFed Cir: Limelight Liable for Divided Infringement
With multiple round-trips to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit issued an en banc reversal of the district court’s JMOL on the divided infringement...
View ArticleDisparagement of Prior Technology Limits Patent Claim Coverage
The appellate court which handles patent appeals from the U. S. District Court ruled that if a patentee disparages prior art in pre-existing technology, the patented invention in the claims does not...
View ArticleConsultant’s Rights to Invention Outside of Agreement
In TriReme Medical LLC v. Angioscore, Inc., 2015-1504 (Fed. Cir. 2016)(Available Here), the Federal Circuit remanded the case back to the District Court for a factual determination of whether the...
View ArticleIndefinite Patent Claim Language – A Fatal Flaw
The Patent Appeals Court (the Federal Circuit) reversed its previous decision that the subject patent claims were not indefinite, because there was an intervening change of law when the Supreme Court...
View ArticleContract Violation Restricting Resale Constitutes Patent Infringement
In Lexmark International Inc. v. Impression Products Inc., 2014-1617 (Fed. Cir. February 2016) (available here), the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that when a patentee sells a patented...
View ArticleCarbon Fiber Method Patent Used in B-2 Bombers Not Invalid
The government, in a Court of Federal Claims, invalidated a patent for making carbon fibers (the fibers used in the production of B-2 bombers and F-22 fighter planes) but upon review by the Court of...
View ArticleFed. Cir. Doubles Down on Computer Program Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter
In Re: Ray Smith, Amanda Tears Smith, 2015-1664 (Fed. Cir. 2016)(Available Here), involved a computer program configured as a method of conducting a wagering game. The Court of Appeals for the Federal...
View ArticleCleveland Clinic Diagnostic Patents Found Invalid
In Cleveland Clinic Foundation v. True Health Diagnostics, LLC., 1: 15-cv-2331 (N.D. Ohio 2016) (Available Here), the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio granted the defendant’s...
View ArticleFed Cir: Fairness, Notice of Attack, Right to Reply- Overturned PTAB Decision
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) overturned a USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision when the party challenging patent validity (Dell Inc.) raised, for...
View ArticleNintendo Does Not Infringe IR Pointer Patent and Functional Language Does Not...
In this split decision by the patent appeals court, Nintendo’s Wii game system was found not to infringe UltimatePointer’s patent for a handheld pointing device that can be used to control a cursor on...
View ArticlePatent Office Appeal Board Finds Financial Computer Process Patent Not...
Petitioner sought to invalidate patentee’s financial patent on a modified ATM machine arguing that the patent covered ineligible patent subject matter under Section 101 of the Patent Act but since...
View ArticleWillful Infringement Required to Recover Profits for Trademark Infringement
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that plaintiff could not recover defendant’s profits garnered from its trademark infringement because the jury found no willful infringement by...
View ArticleHair Cut Patent – Ineligible Patent Subject Matter Under Section 101
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit expanded the scope of what is considered to be patent ineligible subject matter, denying patent status to a class of process-methods, relating to abstract...
View ArticleCard Game – Ineligible Patent Subject Matter Under Section 101
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit expanded the scope of what is considered to be patent ineligible subject matter, denying patent status to a class of process-methods, relating to abstract...
View Article
/fit-in/580x348/filters:format(webp)/english-betterindia/media/media_files/2026/09/17/balaghat-4-2026-09-17-19-01-31.png)
