Categories
Archives
Receive Email Updates
-
-
Certified Licensing Professionals, Inc., 2021 Disclaimer
This blog, Patents4Life, does not contain legal advice and is for informational purposes only. Its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship nor is it a solicitation for business. This is the personal blog of Warren Woessner and does not reflect the views of Schwegman Lundberg & Woessner, or any of its attorneys or staff. To the best of his ability, the Author provides current and accurate information at the time of each post, however, readers should check for current information and accuracy.
- About Me
Warren D. Woessner Pages
Archives
Tag Archives: Federal Circuit
Commil USA v. Cisco Systems – Induced Infringement In For Clarification
Supreme Court granted cert. to resolve the question of whether or not a defendant’s belief that a patent is invalid is a defense against a charge of inducing infringement. The question appears to rest on Judge Newman’s characterization given in her … Continue reading
C.I.T. v. Hughes Comm. – Survival Guide for Software?
On November 3, 2014, in Cal. Inst. Of Tech. v. Hughes Communications., 2014 U.S.. Dist. LEXIS 156763 (C.D. Cal. 2014), Judge Mariana Pfaelzer penned the most thorough defense of software claims attacked under s. 101 that I have seen since … Continue reading
Genetic Technologies v. Bristol Myers – 101 At Work
In the recent memorandum opinion, the court invalidated claim 1 of U.S. Pat. No. 5,612,179, owned by Genetic Technologies, Ltd., as “impermissibly [claiming] a natural phenomenon.” (Genetic Technologies, Ltd. v. Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, C.A. No. 12-394-LPS (D. Delaware, Oct. 30, … Continue reading
Posted in Patent Eligible Subject Matter
Tagged Federal Circuit, Genetic Technologies, intellectual property, ip, Mayo, Myriad, Patent Law, patents, Warren Woessner
1 Comment
American Calcar v. Amer. Honda Motor Co. – Therasense Goes Out For a Test Drive
On Friday, in American Calcar v. Amer. Honda Motor Co., App. No. 2013-1061 (Fed. Cir., September 26, 2014) a divided Fed. Cir. panel affirmed the district court’s ruling, following remand, that three patents on a multimedia system for vehicle information … Continue reading