Spectralytics, Inc. v. Cordis Corp., Nos. 2009-1564, 2010-1004 (Fed. Cir. June 13, 2011) (Judges Newman, Clevenger, and Bryson) Another week, another case involving stents. (Last week’s case was Boston Scientific Corp. v. Johnson & Johnson. You can read our summary of that opinion here.) This case is about Spectralytics’s patent for manufacturing coronary stents. According […]
Category: Matt’s Posts
Microsoft v. i4i – SCOTUS Standardizes the Invalidity Standard
Today, the Supreme Court issued a widely anticipated opinion in Microsoft v. i4i, 564 U. S. ____ (June 9, 2011), unanimously reaffirming the clear and convincing evidence standard for proving that a patent is invalid. The result is—perhaps—not surprising. Under 35 U.S.C. § 282, a patent must be presumed valid, although the standard of proof […]
An Infringement Accusation by Any Other Name Is Still an Infringement Accusation
Andersen Corp. v. Pella Corp., No. 2010-1481 (Fed. Cir. May 17, 2011) (non-precedential order) (Judge Gajarsa) This is an interesting little order. Andersen sued W.L. Gore and Pella for infringement of its patent related to a reduced visibility insect screen. The parties settled all issues except for an indemnification dispute between W.L. Gore and Pella. […]
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 […]
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); […]
Patent Practitioners or Supreme Court Specialists?
What do you think—should we have patent practitioners arguing patent cases at the Supreme Court? Yesterday, the Supreme Court heard the parties’ arguments in the Microsoft v. i4i case. The issue the Court is considering relates to the proper standard of proof for proving a patent is invalid. (35 U.S.C. § 282 states that an […]