Charles Bieneman
Principal author, The Software IP Report

Inequitable Conduct After Therasense Does Not Always Require "But-for" Materiality

Even under the heightened “but-for” materiality standard for proving inequitable conduct in patent prosecution set forth by the Federal Circuit in Therasense, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co., 649 F.3d 1276, 1287 (F… Read More

How Far Do the DMCA's Anti-circumvention Provisions Go?

Taking a practical “I-know-it-when-I see-it” approach, a Nevada court considered the applicability of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (“DMCA”), 17 U.S.C. § 1201(a)(2), and other statutes, to mechanisms that a… Read More

Software Patent (and Other) Lessons From Prometheus v. Mayo

In addressing claims directed to medical diagnoses, the Supreme Court’s opinion in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. may actually lend some clarity to questions of patentability pertaining to soft… Read More

Amending Patent Infringement Contentions

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

Enforcing Trade Secrets and IP Contract Rights

What happens when parties to a joint development agreement don’t follow agreed-to procedures for identifying technology created under the agreement?  Lawyers can ensure that joint development agreements are larded with proc… Read More

Misrepresenting Infringement Under the DMCA

A pro se plaintiff was unable to plead adequately that Viacom had knowingly misrepresented that the plaintiff infringed Viacom’s copyrights when Viacom sent DMCA takedown notices to various content providers.  Ouellette v.… Read More

Meeting the Notice Pleading Standard for Patent Infringement

The court in Gradient Enterprises, Inc. v. Skype Technologies S.A, No. 10-CV-6712L (W.D.N.Y. March 13, 2012), addressed the confusion concerning pleading standards in patent infringement actions following the Supreme Court’s… Read More

No Personal Jurisdiction in Cybersquatting Case

An entity alleged to be the alter ego of a plaintiff bringing an action for reverse domain name hijacking is not subject to the personal jurisdiction of the court on a trademark infringement counterclaim.  AIRFX v. AirFX, No. CV… Read More

Stays Pending Reexamination: Timing Matters

As demonstrated by the recent opinion in Interwoven, Inc. v. Vertical Computer Systems, Inc., No. C 10-04645 RS (N.D. Cal. Mar. 8, 2012), timing and circumstances can be very important when seeking a stay of litigation pending a p… Read More

Claims Upheld Under Bilski in the E.D. Texas

A recent Eastern District of Texas decision found patentable subject matter in claims directed to determining Current Procedural Technology (“CPT”) codes based on information gathered during a physician-patient encount… Read More

Upcoming Webinar

Functional Claiming: Pitfalls and How To’s
October 18, 2018 at 12:00 pm EDT
Recent decisions under 35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 112, and 103 come into focus when viewed through a common lens. During the October webinar, Daniel Hegner of Bejin Bieneman discusses the convergence of federal court and PTAB decisions questioning funct…Register

Subscribe