You hear a lot about patent litigation in district courts. And, over the past several years, the new inter partes review procedure has seen a lot of attention (including last week’s renewed effort to try to kill off the single most effective tool we have for invalidating bad patents.) You don’t hear that much about…
Blog Posts
Leaping Dismissal With A Single Order, It’s FTC v. Qualcomm!
by Josh Landau • • 3 Comments
Monday, Judge Koh issued an order denying Qualcomm’s motion to dismiss in the FTC v. Qualcomm lawsuit. This is just the first step in the lawsuit, but there are some pretty important signals buried in this order. Motions To Dismiss A motion to dismiss is a request, filed by one side or the other and…
IPR Statistics – Success Is Sector Specific
by Josh Landau • • 4 Comments
Yesterday, I published an extensive analysis of Senator Coons’ STRONGER Patents Act. As I said then, the bill would neuter the IPR process, removing any real reason to ever pursue one (assuming you could even file one after the changes to the estoppel, real party in interest, and standing provisions.) One of the reasons I’ve…
STRONGER Patents, WEAKER Innovation
by Josh Landau • • 9 Comments
Yesterday, Senator Coons introduced his STRONGER Patents Act. Senator Coons provided a section-by-section description of the bill, as well as the text of the bill. And after reading it, I have some concerns. Patent Progress previously covered Senator Coons’ STRONG Patents Act. Much of STRONG Patents wound up in STRONGER Patents, and our analysis back…
Apple v. Qualcomm – Double Dipping and Breaking Promises
by Josh Landau • • 4 Comments
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…
Should Abstract Ideas Be Unpatentable? The Answer Is A Snap
by Josh Landau • • 3 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…