Andersen Corp. v. Fiber Composites, LLC
The Court construed the disputed terms restrictively, finding that the specifications and prosecution history of the patents required a specific process.
|
Dippin' Dots, Inc., et al. v. Mosey, et al. v. Esty, Jr., et al.
Court affirms summary judgment on non-infringement, obviousness, and unenforceability of a patent directed to a process for making a form of cryogenically prepared novelty ice cream product due to the "on sale" bar. Court reverses on fraud on the Patent and Trademark Office and antitrust counterclaims finding insufficient evidence of fraud.
|
E-Pass Technologies, Inc. v. 3Com Corp.
Patentee loses appeal of summary judgment order of non-infringement because the district court had applied correct claim construction and because patentee did not present sufficient evidence of infringement.
|
Honeywell Int'l Inc. v. Universal Avionics Systems Corp.
Summary Judgment in Relation to Patents Covering Aviation Electronics Technology Affirmed-in-Part, Vacated-in-Part, and Remanded
|
Israel Bio-Eng'g Project v. Amgen Inc.
Plaintiff did not have standing to bring an infringement suit because it did not have complete ownership of the patent, and could not voluntarily join the co-owner of the patent.
|
Transclean Corp. v. Jiffy Lube Int'l, Inc.
Claim preclusion bars patentee from filing suit against purchasers of an infringing product when it should have included them in earlier suit against manufacturer of infringing product.
|
Wechsler v. Macke International Trade, Inc. et al
The Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of JMOL that O’Rouke was personally liable for inducing infringement of the ’592 patent and the district court’s denial of JMOL on the issue of lost profit damages. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s grant of summary judgment that Macke is not the alter ego of O’Rouke.
|