Category: Federal Circuit Spotlight

Fed Circuit Says Software Toolbars Not “Icon”-ic, and Captures Recapture Rules

In re Mostafazadeh, No. 2010-1260 (Fed. Cir. May 3, 2011) (Judges Dyk, Friedman, and Prost) This is a case involving a reissue application for a patent directed to lead frame based semiconductor packaging.  In the original prosecution of the patent, the applicant overcame anticipation and obviousness rejections by amending the claims to require a “circular […]

Can’t Break Down These Doors: Firewalls and Doggy Doors Stand Up Against Lawsuits

Radio Systems Corp. v. Accession, Inc., No. 2010-1390 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 25, 2011) (Judges Bryson, Linn, and Dyk) This case involves a common question of personal jurisdiction: how much local activity is enough to create specific jurisdiction? In this case, a product preview meeting wasn’t enough. Radio Systems is based in Tennessee and makes, among […]

License or No License: That Is the Question

Rembrandt Data Techs., LP v. AOL, LLC, No. 2010-1002 (Fed. Cir. April 18, 2011) (Judges Gajarsa, Linn, and Dyk) “License or no license: that is the question.”  The Federal Circuit’s answer was “yes.”  After reviewing a complicated licensing and patent transfer history, the court held that there was no patent infringement because Rembrandt’s patent rights […]

Divided Infringement Question Yields Divided Opinion

McKesson Technologies Inc. v. Epic Systems Corporation, No. 2010-1291 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 12, 2011) (Judges Linn, Bryson, and Newman) McKesson adds to a recent line of cases in which the Federal Circuit has articulated a higher standard for proving joint infringement. See also BMC Resources, Inc. v. Paymentech, L.P., 498 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2007); […]

Newsflash: Patent Required to Sue for Patent Infringment

Omura v. Shafer, No. 2010-1357 (Fed. Cir. April 8, 2011) (Judges Bryson, Schall, and Moore) (nonprecedential). One must proceed with care when engaging in interference practice. The Federal Circuit recently affirmed the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (BPAI) decision directing entry of judgment against the senior party to the interference, Omura, because of a […]

Panel Doesn’t See Eye-to-Eye on Written Description Requirement

Citigroup Inc. v. Capital City Bank Group, Inc., No. 2010-1369 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 28, 2011) (Judges Rader, Gajarsa, and Prost) In the first trademark opinion that the Federal Circuit has handed down this year, the court affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board’s (TTAB) denial of Citigroup’s opposition to Capital City Bank’s (CCB) registration of […]