A domestic case may be dispositive of a foreign case for the purpose of an antisuit injunction even if the case only resolves the issue of a temporary injunction and not the entire proceeding. To be dispositive, it is only required that the domestic case has the potential to resolve the foreign issue.
A court may engage in claim construction when deciding a motion to dismiss without a separate claim construction proceeding. A plural claim term may mean one or more if there is sufficient evidence to overcome the presumption that the plural term requires at least two.
A trial court’s decision regarding whether an allegation is well-pled and factual or merely a conclusory legal statement is reviewed de novo.
A party may violate Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act by falsely claiming that a product or service is patented if the advertisement misleads consumers about the nature, characteristics, or qualities of the product or service.
A device must be readily configurable to meet the claim limitations to infringe an asserted claim. The failure to obtain advice from a third party regarding an allegedly infringed patent cannot be used to prove willful infringement.
The Federal Circuit granted Google’s rehearing petition, vacating the decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, to reassess testimony from EcoFactor’s damages expert concerning reasonable royalty rates.
Patent eligibility under Section 101 should only be addressed if this issue is raised by one of the parties.
Claim construction requires each claim to be construed on a claim-by-claim basis. Therefore, the functional limitations between claims in a patent may vary as long as the boundaries of that functional limitation is clearly defined within each claim.
Want updates when we have new case summaries? Enter your email below to subscribe!