Intellectual Property News and Reports

Supernus Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and United Therapeutics Corp. appeal the entry of summary judgment by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. The district court determined that, based on this court’s decision in Gilead Sciences, Inc. v. Lee,... Read more →

Dr. Mark Barry brought this action against Medtronic, Inc., alleging that Medtronic induced surgeons to infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 7,670,358 and 8,361,121, which Dr. Barry owns and which name him as the sole inventor. The jury found infringement of method... Read more →

Held: A commercial sale to a third party who is required to keep the invention confidential may place the invention “on sale” under §102(a). The patent statute in force immediately before the AIA included an on-sale bar. This Court’s precedent... Read more →

This case returns to us from the Supreme Court. WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., 138 S. Ct. 2129 (2018) (“WesternGeco III”). The sole claim remanded to us by the Supreme Court is the lost profits award. The Supreme Court... Read more →

Guild Mortgage Co. (“Guild”) appeals a decision of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board affirming the examiner’s refusal to register the mark “GUILD MORTGAGE COMPANY” and design shown below based on a likelihood of confusion with the registered mark “GUILD... Read more →

Amerigen Pharmaceuticals Limited (“Amerigen”) appeals from the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) in an inter partes review (“IPR”) holding that claims 1–5 and 21–24 of U.S. Patent 6,858,650 (the... Read more →

The panel affirmed the district court’s dismissal of an action brought by a financial services company under the Lanham Act. The panel held that the district court abused its discretion when it sanctioned the plaintiff and dismissed the case pursuant... Read more →

Hewlett Packard Enterprise Co., HP Enterprise Services, LLC, and Teradata Operations, Inc. (collectively, “HP”) sought inter partes review of claims 1–4, 8, 14–17, 21, and 28 of U.S. Patent No. 6,597,812 (the ’812 patent) before the U.S. Patent and Trademark... Read more →

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board issued a final written decision ruling certain claims of AC Technologies S.A.’s U.S. Patent No. 7,904,680 unpatentable. On reconsideration, it invalidated the remaining claims based on a ground of unpatentability raised by Amazon.com, Inc.... Read more →

Springboards to Education, Inc., sued Houston Independent School District under the Lanham Act for using its marks in the course of operating a summer-reading program. The district court disposed of Springboards’ claims on summary judgment because it concluded that a... Read more →