Basic background of inter partes review An IPR refers to an inter partes review. The IPR is an administrative proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the USPTO in which a petitioner can request claims of a patent be invalidated to avoid patent infringement liability. The petitioner is normally a business competitor to the patent owner wherein the patent … [Read more...]
Patent infringement
Patent infringement occurs when a person directly infringes a patent or indirectly contributes or induces another party to infringe the patent through the manufacture, use, offer to sell, sale or importation of a product covered by a patent claim into the United States.
Browse related articles below.
Collateral estoppel applies to similar claim terms in a patent family
Collateral estoppel is a legal rule that protects a party from having to litigate issues that have already been fully and fairly tried in a previous action and adversely resolved against a party-opponent. This rule can work against the patent owner or the defendant during litigation. Collateral estoppel works against the patent owner In general but not always, collateral … [Read more...]
How to establish USE of system claim to establish patent infringement?
A system claim is a claim directed to a system having a number of different components that work together. In Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Motorola Mobility LLC (Fed. Cir. 2017), the patent claim being litigated was a system claim. The patent was directed to the broad concept of transferring computer files electronically from one location to another, and more particularly … [Read more...]
Causal nexus requirement of the irreparable injury factor
Four factors for a permanent injunction To secure a permanent injunction, the patent owner must demonstrate that four factors favor issuance of the permanent injunction. These four factors include (1) that it has suffered an irreparable injury; (2) that remedies available at law are inadequate to compensate for that injury; (3) that considering the balance of hardships between … [Read more...]
When is fee shifting in patent litigation appropriate?
Under the American rule, each party to a lawsuit pays its own attorney’s fees. However, the American rule can be circumvented by statute enacted by the government or by contract through agreement by the parties. In patent litigation, fee shifting is appropriate by statute under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Section 285 states that "the court in exceptional cases may award reasonable … [Read more...]
Transitional phrase in a claim determines scope of patent protection
A patent claim has three major sections, namely, a preamble, a transitional phrase and a body. The body of the claim contains the elements which define the scope of patent protection as defined by that claim. The transitional phrase indicates whether incorporating other elements or components in an accused infringing device other than those elements recited in the body would … [Read more...]
Patent based injunction granted due to reputational harm
I. Preliminary injunction background An issued patent provides its owner the right to exclude or stop others from competing against the patented invention. However, that right has been weakened in that it is much harder to convince a court to grant an injunction than before. Before 2006, a court would regularly grant an injunction upon showing an issued patent coupled with … [Read more...]
Equitable estoppel is still available to limit patent infringement liability
Under § 286, a defendant’s liability for patent infringement is limited to the preceding six years. Laches used to be a defense that would cut that six year time period even shorter. However, in SCA Hygiene Products v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC (S. Ct. 2017), the Supreme Court held that laches is no longer a defense to patent infringement. This means that the six year … [Read more...]