Peter v. NantKwest was decided by the Supreme Court on December 11, 2019 on appeal from the Eastern District of Virginia. The USPTO rejected Nantkwest’s patent application on obviousness grounds. The PTAB affirmed the rejection, and Nantkwest appealed to the district court under 35 U.S.C. § 145. After prevailing at the …
TCL Communication v. Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson was decided on December 5, 2019 on appeal from the Central District of California. Following a bench trial, the district court determined that declaratory defendant Ericsson’s proposed offers were not “fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory” (FRAND). “Over Ericsson’s repeated assertions of its jury trial right,” …
VirnetX v. Apple is a nonprecendential case decided on November 22, 2019 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. The district court entered summary judgment for plaintiff VirnetX on invalidity, determining that defendant Apple was precluded from pressing its proposed invalidity challenges because of previous litigation between the parties. The …
Section 285 of the Patent Act provides that a district “court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.” The Supreme Court in Octane Fitness v. Icon Health held that an exceptional case “is simply one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a …
OrthoAccel Technologies v. Propel Orthodontics is a nonprecedential case decided on September 23, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. The district court denied plaintiff OrthoAccel’s motion for a preliminary injunction because defendant Propel raised a substantial question of validity for the patent under anticipation. OrthoAccel appealed. The Federal …
UCP v. Balsam is a nonprecedential case decided on September 19, 2019 and unsealed on October 7, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. Balsam sued Frontgate (a third party) alleging infringement of certain patents. After the claim construction order, the parties settled, whereby Frontgate agreed to stop purchasing the relevant product …
UCP v. Balsam Brands is a nonprecedential case decided on September 19, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of California. The district court granted declaratory judgment plaintiff UCP’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement. The district court then granted-in-part and denied-in-part UCP’s motion for attorney fees against declaratory defendant Balsam, holding that “UCP …
Chrimar Systems v. ALE U.S. is a nonprecedential case decided on September 19, 2019 on appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. After a jury trial returned a verdict against defendant ALE in a case involving four patents, the district court entered a judgment awarding plaintiff Chrimar damages and post-verdict ongoing royalties. …
Chamberlain Group v. Techtronic Industries was decided on August 21, 2019 on appeal from the Northern District of Illinois. After the jury found plaintiff Chamberlain’s patents infringed and not invalid, the district court the district court granted an injunction, enhanced damages and attorney fees. The district court denied defendant Techtronic’s motion for JMOL …
Anza Tech. v. Mushkin was decided on August 16, 2019 on appeal from the District of Colorado. Plaintiff Anza filed this action in March 2017 against Defendant Mushkin in the Eastern District of California. In September 2017, Anza filed its first amended complaint, which joined Avant as a co-defendant. The …