Uncategorized

SCA Hygiene Products v. First Quality Baby Products — Supreme Court Eliminates Laches as Defense to Patent Infringement Within Statute of Limitations

The Supreme Court held 7-1 that laches cannot be used as a defense to patent infringement that occurred within the six-year statute of limitations — extending Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer (copyright) to patent law and eliminating a long-standing Federal Circuit precedent that had allowed laches t

Uncategorized

Mentor Graphics v. EVE-USA (2017) — Federal Circuit Holds Panduit Lost Profits Analysis Satisfies Apportionment Without Separate Apportionment Step

The Federal Circuit held that when a patentee satisfies all four Panduit factors for lost profits — including proving demand driven by the patented feature and no acceptable non-infringing substitutes — no further separate apportionment of those profits is required, because the Panduit analysis inhe

Uncategorized

Intellectual Ventures v. Capital One Financial — Federal Circuit Strikes Down XML and Data-Collection Patents as Abstract Ideas

The Federal Circuit affirmed invalidation of Intellectual Ventures’ XML-formatting and financial data-collection patents under Section 101, holding that organizing, collecting, recognizing, and storing data — even when dressed in domain-specific vocabulary — is a patent-ineligible abstract ide

Uncategorized

Praxair Distribution v. Mallinckrodt Hospital — Federal Circuit Holds Nitric Oxide Dosing Method Patent Ineligible

The Federal Circuit held Mallinckrodt’s patents on methods of supplying inhaled nitric oxide therapy while monitoring patients for adverse effects were patent-ineligible under § 101 — finding the claims directed to the natural phenomenon that nitric oxide can worsen pulmonary edema in certain

Uncategorized

WesternGeco v. ION Geophysical — Federal Circuit Bars Foreign Lost Profit Damages Under Section 271(f), Later Reversed by Supreme Court

The Federal Circuit reversed a $93 million foreign lost-profits award for ION’s domestic infringement under Section 271(f), holding that the presumption against extraterritoriality barred recovery for overseas contracts WesternGeco would have won absent the infringement — a ruling the Supreme

Scroll to Top