Previous month:
April 2011
Next month:
June 2011

EBay and PayPal sue Google over trade secrets

By Yinka Adegoke | Reuters

NEW YORK (Reuters) - EBay and its online payment unit, PayPal Inc, on Thursday sued Google Inc and two executives for stealing trade secrets related to mobile payment systems.

The two executives, Osama Bedier and Stephanie Tilenius, were formerly with PayPal and led the launch on Thursday of Google's own mobile payment system in partnership with MasterCard, Citigroup and phone company Sprint.

The suit highlights the growing battle by a wide range of companies from traditional finance to Silicon Valley trying to take a major stake in what has been described as a $1 trillion opportunity in mobile payments. The mobile phone is seen as the digital personal wallet of the future.

Full story.

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

William A Graham Co. v. Haughey

In a copyright infringement dispute involving defendant's surreptitious infringement of plaintiff's copyrights over the course of more than a decade, judgment of the district court awarding $19 million in damages and $4.6 million in prejudgment interest is affirmed where jury award does not shock the judicial conscience and prejudgment interest award is not contrary to law.

Download William A. Graham Co. v. Haughey

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

US v. Amirnazmi

Conviction and sentencing of defendant for principally violating the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), 18 U.S.C. section 371, for marketing a software program to Iranian actors and forming agreements with Iranian entities to provide technology to facilitate the construction of multiple chemical plants, are upheld where: 1) district court properly held that IEEPA does not violate the nondelegation doctrine; and 2) defendant's actions that occurred more than five years prior to the indictment were part of a continuing course of conduct that extended into the limitations period and contributed to the charged conspiracy, such that they were not barred by the statute of limitations.

Download US v. Amirnazmi

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

In re Brimonidine Patent Litigation

In a patent action involving an eyedrop formulation for the treatment of glaucoma, judgment of the district court is affirmed-in-part and reversed-in-part with respect to one defendant, but reversed with respect the other, where: 1) as applied to first defendant, the district court erred in its determination that the asserted claims are not invalid but properly determined that defendant failed to satisfy its burden to show that each asserted claim of the related patents is invalid as a matter of law; and 2) the district court erred by assuming that second defendant would manufacture a drug outside of the parameters of its Abbreviated New Drug Application.

Download In Re Brimonidine Patent Litigation

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

Arris Group, Inc. v. British Telecommunications PLC

In a patent action seeking injunctive relief and a declaratory judgment on the grounds of invalidity and non-infringement of patents that claim systems and methods that relate in particular to cable networks that offer Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephone services, district court's dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is reversed where action presents an Article III dispute.

Download Arris Group, Inc. v. British Telecommunications PLC

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

In re Huai-Hung Kao, No. 2010-1307

In a dispute arising from the rejection of three patent applications relating to controlled-release tablets containing oxymorphone, judgment of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences is affirmed in part and vacated in part where decision of obviousness regarding applications was supported by substantial evidence in one instance but lacked evidentiary support with regards to the final two applications.

Download In Re Huai-Hung Kao

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc., No. 2009-1299

In companion patent infringement actions arising from several claims involving Synchronous Dynamic Random Access Memory (SDRAM) and Double Data Rate SDRAM memory (DDR SDRAM) in memory chip technology, judgment of the district court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where court: 1) improperly applied too narrow a standard of foreseeability in determining that litigation was not reasonably foreseeable until 1999; 2) properly passed judgment on waiver and estoppel grounds; 3) properly construed claims; 4) properly denied plaintiff's motion for JMOL or a new trial; 5) properly denied plaintiff's motion for a new trail on the basis of obviousness; and 6) properly granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement under proposed claim construction challenge.

Download Hynix Semiconductor Inc. v. Rambus Inc.

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

Micron Technology, Inc. v. Rambus Inc., No. 2009-1263

In companion patent infringement actions involving several patents covering various aspects of dynamic random access memory (DRAM) in computer memory chips, judgment of the district court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where court: 1) improperly applied too narrow a standard of foreseeability in determining that litigation was not reasonably foreseeable until 1999; 2) properly passed judgment on waiver and estoppel grounds; 3) properly construed claims; 4) properly denied plaintiff's motion for JMOL or a new trial; 5) properly denied plaintiff's motion for a new trail on the basis of obviousness; and 6) properly granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment of non-infringement under proposed claim construction challenge.

Download Micron Tech, Inc. v. Rambus, Inc.

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.

Penguin Group (USA) Inc. v. Am. Buddha, No. 09-1739

In a copyright infringement action involving the scope of New York's long-arm statute, judgment of the district court dismissing action for lack of personal jurisdiction is reversed because in a copyright infringement case involving the uploading of a copyrighted printed literary work onto the Internet, the situs of injury for purposes of determining long-arm jurisdiction is the location of the copyright holder.

Download Penguin Group (USA) Inc. v. Am Buddha, No. 09-1739

Please visit Gehrke & Associates, SC to learn more about how to enhance and defend your intellectual property.  Thank you.