United Construction v. Tile Tech was decided on December 15, 2016 on appeal from the Central District of California. The patent concerned a support pedestal adapted to support surface tiles to form an elevated building surface. After “a series of delays, missed deadlines, and other procedural missteps by [defendant] Tile Tech,” …
Alfred E. Mann Foundation v. Cochlear was decided on November 17, 2016 on appeal from the Central District of California. There, the district court entered judgment finding claims of one asserted patent infringed and claims of another patent invalid for indefiniteness. The jury found that defendant Cochlear’s infringement was willful under …
Large Audience Display v. Tennman is a nonprecedential case decided on October 20, 2016 on appeal from the Central District of California. There, after the PTO issued an IPR certificate cancelling all of Plaintiff Large Audience’s claims asserted in the district court, the district court dismissed the case with prejudice. Defendants …
Gart v. Logitech was decided on August 21, 2001 on appeal from the Central District of California. The case involved many issues but this post will only focus on actual notice under § 287(a). In 1989, prior to the issuance of the patent-in-suit, plaintiff Gart approached defendant Logitech to discuss licensing the …