Intellectual Property

Blogs RSS Link
Feit Elec. Co., Inc. v. CFL Techs. LLC, No. 13 C 9339, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Dec. 20, 2019) (Coleman, J.). Judge Coleman granted declaratory judgment plaintiff Feit’s motion for reconsideration of the Court’s grant of summary judgement that declaratory judgment defendant CFL’s ‘464 patent was unenforceable  based upon issue preclusion from a prior inequitable conduct determination. An interlocutory appeal was appropriate for the following reason: The issue was purely legal, not requiring an extensive review of the record; The issue of whether the change of law provision applied in this case was different based upon which Federal Circuit case…
Apple Inc. v. Andrea Electronics Corporation Docket No. 2018-2382, -2383 (IPR2017-00626, -00627) DYK, PLAGER, STOLL February 7, 2020 Brief Summary: Board erroneously excluded Apple’s IPR reply arguments as new as compared to IPR petition (‘626 remanded), and no anticipation or obviousness finding affirmed (‘627). Summary: Apple appealed two IPR final written decisions (‘626 FWD and ‘627 FWD) regarding Andrea’s US 6,363,345 relating to digital audio processing (“[a]n apparatus for cancelling noise” using a “threshold detector”). Apple challenged ‘345 patent claims 1-25 and 38-47 but this appeal relates to claims 6-9. Regarding the ‘626 FWD, Apple challenged claims 6-9 as obvious…
Life After Hate, Inc. a/k/a Exit USA v. Free Radicals Proj., Inc., No. 18 C 6967, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Sep. 30, 2019) (Kendall, J.). Judge Kendall granted plaintiff Life After Hate a/k/a Exit USA’s (“LAH”) motion for preliminary injunction preventing defendants (collectively “Free Radicals”) from using LAH’s LIFE AFTER HATE, NO JUDGMENT. JUST HELP., and EXIT USA marks in this Lanham Act trademark infringement and cybersquatting dispute. The injunction also prevented use of LAH’s website, twitter handle, YouTube channels and videos. As an initial matter, the Court noted that both plaintiff and defendants provide “critical” services helping people disengage…
Cheetah Omni LLC v. AT&T Services, Inc. et al. Docket No. 2019-1264 LOURIE, BRYSON, CHEN February 6, 2020 Brief Summary: DC dismissal of Cheetah’s claims against AT&T affirmed since grandchild patent was impliedly included in prior license to grandparent parent. Summary: Cheetah appealed DC dismissal of its claims of infringement of US 7,522,836 relating to optical communication networks with prejudice due to a prior agreement to settle litigation (the ROADM litigation). The prior agreement was made with Fujitsu and Ciena. After Cheetah asserted the ‘836 patent against AT&T, Ciena successfully intervened as it manufacture and supplies components to AT&T that…
Checksum Ventures, LLC v. Dell Inc., No. 18 C 6321, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Sep. 30, 2019) (Dow, J.). Judge Dow granted defendant Dell’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss plaintiff Checksum’s patent as invalid as unpatentable pursuant to 35 U.S.C. Section 101, with leave to amend in this patent dispute regarding a checksum data identifier – used to identify whether data is identical. Of particular note, the Court held as follows: The ‘906 patent claimed abstract ideas because it did “nothing more than ‘recite generalized steps to be performed on a computer using conventional computer activity.” Citing…
Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Biogen MA Inc. IPR2018-01403 (PTAB Final Written Decision) February 5, 2020 Brief Summary: Biogen’s Tecfidera-related US 8,399,514 B2 (“method of treating…multiple sclerosis” not obvious due in part to unexpected results (IPR final written decision). Summary: Mylan challenged Biogen’s Tecfidera-related US 8,399,514 B2 (“method of treating…multiple sclerosis” with “dimethyl fumarate, monomethyl fumarate, or a combination thereof”) as obvious (§ 103) in view of four combinations of references (four grounds). The final written decision (FWD) indicates that the ‘514 patent has been involved in two other IPRs (IPR2015-01993, IPR2015–01136, Coalition for Affordable Drugs v LLC) and one interference…
HVLPO2, LLC v. Oxygen Frog, LLC, Scott D. Fleischman Docket No. 2019-1649 NEWMAN, MOORE, CHEN February 5, 2020 Brief Summary: DC’s limiting jury instructions regarding obviousness because “lay witness” was not qualified as an expert. Summary: HVO appealed DC denial of its motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) that US 8,876,941 and 9,372,488 relating to managing an oxygen generating system (e.g., “for torch glass artists”) should have been found obvious by the jury or, alternatively, “for a new trial based on the admission of lay opinion testimony on the issue of obviousness.” The DC granted partial summary…
Seven Oaks Millwork Inc. d/b/a Royal Corinthian v. Royal Foam US, LLC, No. 19 C 6234, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Dec. 13, 2019) (Kocoras, J.). Judge Kocoras granted defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(2) motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and denied as moot defendants’ Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim in this copyright dispute over a copyrighted product catalog. Plaintiff Royal Corinthian’s operation of an interactive website with sales capabilities did not alone create personal jurisdiction in Illinois. Furthermore, defendants’ use of targeted advertising was not sufficient to create…
Intelligent Automation Design, LLC v. Zimmer Biomet CMF et al. Docket No. 2019-1100 PROST, WALLACH, HUGHES January 30, 2020 Non-precedential Brief Summary: DC determination of means-plus-function construction affirmed but reversed as to whether sufficient structure was disclosed. Summary: IAD appealed DC finding that claims 1 and 6 of US 7,091,683 relating to methods for using a motor to drive a screwdriver bit invalid for indefiniteness under 112, § 6 (means-plus-function). Under 112, § 6, “‘[a]n element in a claim for a combination…expressed as a means…for performing a specified function…shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure’ described in the specification.”…
Koninklijke Philips N.V. v. Google, LLC, Microsoft Corp. et al. Docket No. 2019-1177 (IPR2017-00447) MOORE, O’MALLEY, STOLL January 30, 2020 Brief Summary: Board IPR obviousness determination regarding Phillips’s claims affirmed (e.g., § 311(b) limitation on prior art does not mean one can “ignore the skilled artisan’s knowledge when determining” obviousness). Summary: Philips appealed Board IPR decision finding claims 1-11 of US 7,529,806 relating to methods for providing multiple formats of a media presentation invalid for obviousness. The Board found the claims obvious over “SMIL 1.0” teaching a computer language including “a ‘switch’ element that specifies a set of alternative files…
Galderma Labs., L.P. et al. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Docket No. 2019-2396, -1213 MOORE, O’MALLEY, STOLL January 29, 2020 Non-precedential Brief Summary: DC finding of inherent anticipation reversed as it relied on a second reference to provide limitations missing from the first. Summary: Galderma appealed DC holding that Orange Book (OB) patents US 9,089,587; 9,233,117; and 9,223,118 are invalid for anticipation (§ 102) due to inherent prior art disclosure. This case relates to Teva’s ANDA No. 210019 regarding a generic of Galderma’s Soolantra® (1% ivermectin topical cream, for treatment of papulopustular rosacea (PPR), NDA N206255, eight other OB patents not…
TWD, LLC v. Grunt Style LLC, No. 18 C 7695, Slip Op. (N.D. Ill. Oct. 23, 2019) (Kocoras, J.). Judge Kocoras granted in part defendant-counterclaimant Grunt Style’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings and granted Grunt Style’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(f) motion to strike plaintiff-counterdefendant TWD’s affirmative defenses in this Lanham Act case involving the THIS WE’LL DEFEND mark. TWD brought a Lanham Act trademark infringement claim pursuant to the Lanham Act § 1114 and sought injunctive relief pursuant to § 1116. Grunt Style argued that the Court should dismiss the § 1116 claim…
Global Equity Management (GEMSA) v. Ebay Inc., Alibaba.com, Booking.com Docket No. 2019-1304, -1304 (IPR Nos. 2016-01828, -01829) WALLACH, CLEVENGER, STOLL January 14, 2020 Non-precedential Brief Summary: Board decision not to dismiss affirmed since “GEMSA did not meet its burden to ‘produce some evidence that tends to show that [Amazon] should be named a” RPI. Summary: GEMSA appealed PTAB (“Board”) denial of its motions to terminate IPRs regarding US 6,690,400 and 7,356,677 (the Challenged Patents) pursuant to 35 USC § 315(a)(1) (2012) (“[IPR] may not be instituted if…the petitioner or real party in interest [RPI] filed a civil action challenging the…
November patent filings increased slowed as the NPEs slow down for the holidays and year-end, as they usually do. Frequent filers included Electronic Receipts Delivery Systems, Hawk Technology Systems, Internet Media Interactive, Landmark Technology, and Symbology. As usual, I prepared the report in partnership with and using Docket Navigator and its powerful database.  Docket Navigator is a valuable resource, and the place to go if you want to keep track of new patent litigation filings or want to know what is happening in particular cases, how your judge has historically handled a particular type of motion, or a particular plaintiff’s…
Disclaimer – Note that the views expressed herein do not represent the views of any law firm or client, and may not even represent the views of the author. This blog is NOT legal advice and is for informational purposes only. No attorney client relationship can be formed by reading this blog or using any of the information provided. The accuracy of the information provided has not been verified.…
Disclaimer – Note that the views expressed herein do not represent the views of any law firm or client, and may not even represent the views of the author. This blog is NOT legal advice and is for informational purposes only. No attorney client relationship can be formed by reading this blog or using any of the information provided. The accuracy of the information provided has not been verified.…