Many owners of Internet patents must be rejoicing. The Federal Circuit, in a 6-5 en banc decision, has overruled its precedent holding “that in order for a party to be liable for induced infringement, some other single ent…
Read More
The plaintiff in Softview, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Civ. No. 10-389-LPS (D. Del. July 26, 2012), successfully pled willful patent infringement against some defendants, but not others. Publicity about a patent is not enough from which…
Read More
Because the Eastern District of Texas does not limit the scope of discovery to the plaintiff’s infringement contentions, the court in DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, No. 2:06-CV-42-JRG (E.D. Texas, July 18, 2012), granted t…
Read More
In a discovery context, at least, one should assume that a U.S.-based system that activates software sold abroad can infringe a U.S. patent. Prism Technologies v. Adobe Systems Inc., No. 8:10CV220 (D. Neb. July 17, 2012). Pris…
Read More
The Federal Circuit “now holds that the threshold objective prong of the willfulness standard . . . is a question of law based on underlying mixed questions of law and fact and is subject to de novo review.” Bard Per…
Read More
When is a patent infringement defendant entitled to summary judgment of non-infringement under the doctrine of equivalents? That question was addressed in CSB-Systems International, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc., No. 10-2156 (E.D. P…
Read More
A patent claim for configuring a “satellite” credit card of a main credit card was not infringed directly by any defendant, nor was the claim directly infringed by any third party, and therefore it could not be indirec…
Read More
When do the results of claim construction proceedings justify a patent plaintiff in amending its infringement contentions? A court in the Eastern District of Texas allowed the plaintiff to accuse certain software components for…
Read More
