Back in January, Patent Progress wrote about lawsuits filed against Qualcomm by the FTC and by Apple. Today, Apple filed an amended complaint against Qualcomm, based in part on new law resulting from the Supreme Court’s Lexmark decision on patent exhaustion. A High Water Lexmark In Patent Exhaustion The Lexmark case, while important, is actually…
Blog Posts
Should Abstract Ideas Be Unpatentable? The Answer Is A Snap
by Josh Landau • • 2 Comments
Tuesday, Kaldren LLC sued Snap. (According to RPX, Kaldren is affiliated with IP Edge, a notorious patent troll.) Kaldren sued over a set of expired patents on such wonderful ideas as: Printing out a machine readable symbol; Reading a machine readable symbol; Using an address in a machine readable symbol to retrieve information from that…
The Special Nature Of Venue In Patent Law
by Josh Landau • • 1 Comment
TC Heartland continues to impact the world of patent litigation. I haven’t run the numbers yet on what’s happened since the decision came down, but just having read through the list of cases filed, the Eastern District of Texas certainly has seen a reduction in cases filed. Tomorrow morning, the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on…
ContentGuard: Arguendo
by Josh Landau • • 1 Comment
Today, we watched as a man stood in front of a panel and explained how the other side had behaved improperly and how the decisions they made were incorrect and contrary to applicable legal standards. I’m speaking, of course, of the ContentGuard oral arguments. What did you think I was talking about? Oral Argument at the…
ContentGuard: Validity and Privilege
by Josh Landau • • 0 Comments
Monday I summarized the history of the ContentGuard cases, and yesterday I described the process of claim interpretation. Today, we’ll turn to an issue that we’ve focused on recently, patent validity. ContentGuard convinced the jury that the ContentGuard patents were valid—can they convince the Federal Circuit? Abstract Ideas We’ve written a lot about patents on…
ContentGuard: Defining A Patent Case
by Josh Landau • • 1 Comment
Yesterday, I went through the history of the ContentGuard v. Apple and ContentGuard v. Google cases. I talked briefly about the Markman process; today, I’d like to go into more detail on what Markman is, how it works, how Markman affected the ContentGuard cases, and why it’s such an important issue in patent litigation in…
Previewing ContentGuard v. Apple and Google at the Federal Circuit
by Josh Landau • • 2 Comments
This Thursday, June 8, the Federal Circuit will hold oral argument in ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v. Apple, Inc. and in ContentGuard Holdings, Inc. v Google, Inc. (The Google case also includes a number of major Android phone manufacturers, such as Samsung, HTC, and Motorola.) Both cases have roughly similar histories, and both appeals deal with…
Uniloc-ing Defendants Into The Eastern District of Texas
by Josh Landau • • 1 Comment
Yesterday, Uniloc sued Google in the Eastern District of Texas. Uniloc is a Luxembourg based company, not a Texas company.1 Google? Also not a Texas company. So, if neither of the companies involved are Texan, why are we still in the Eastern District of Texas? History Uniloc filed a set of lawsuits against Google based…
Guest Post: How TC Heartland May Affect District Court Filings: A Quantitative Assessment
by Unified Patents • • 0 Comments
This guest post was authored by Shawn Ambwani and Robert Jain. Shawn Ambwani is the COO and co-founder of Unified Patents. Robert Jain is an attorney at Unified Patents. This post provides a quantitative prediction of how TC Heartland may impact where patent litigation is filed, a topic I recently wrote about. Summary TC Heartland…
One Week of TC Heartland
by Josh Landau • • 2 Comments
It’s been one week since TC Heartland was decided. I thought I’d take a preliminary look at how the decision has changed case filing strategies. In order to do so, I looked at at how many new patent cases had been filed in which jurisdictions from Tuesday-Friday of last week (5/23-5/26), in comparison to the…