Jurisdiction under FRCP 4(k)(2) (Mandamus) In re Stingray IP Sols., LLC, 56 F.4th 1379, 1381 (Fed. Cir. Jan 9, 2023) (Lourie, Taranto, Stark) Mandamus to E.D. Tex. (Gilstrap, J.) Background Foreign defendants, TP-Link Technologies Co., Ltd. (China) and TP-Link Corporation Limited (Hong Kong), sought §1406 transfer, in the alternative, from the Eastern District of Texas […]
Modern Font Applications LLC v. Alaska Airlines, Inc., No. 2021-1838 (Fed Cir (Utah) Dec. 29, 2022). Opinion by Cunningham, joined by Reyna. Dissent by Newman. Summary: Plaintiff, Modern Font Applications LLC (MFA) filed an interlocutory appeal challenging the District of Utah’s order, which affirmed a magistrate judge’s decision to exclude MFA’s in-house counsel from viewing […]
Summary: The Federal Circuit granted Amazon.com, Inc.’s petition, holding that the Western District of Texas abused its discretion by denying Amazon’s motion to sever and motion to transfer. Flygrip Inc. sued Amazon alleging infringement of device cases manufactured by PopSockets LLC and Otter Products LLC. The panel determined that the district court erred because (1) […]
Summary: Two wallet makers accused each other of patent infringement and Plaintiff Mosaic also claimed trade dress infringement. The Federal Circuit upheld the District of Utah’s claim construction and affirmed the dismissal of Mosaic’s infringement claim. The court found genuine disputes of material fact as to whether Mosaic’s SMCII product is prior art to Ridge’s patent […]
American National Manufacturing Inc., v. Sleep Number Corporation CAFC Opinion No. 2021-1321, Decided November 14, 2022 (Stoll, Schall, Cunningham) (Precedential) Overview: A patent owner may amend a claim to both overcome an instituted ground and correct other perceived issues in a claim. Facts/Procedural Posture: Sleep Number sues American National for infringing two patents, and American National […]
Google LLC v. Hammond Development International, Inc. CAFC Opinion No. 21-2218, Decided December 8, 2022 (Moore, Chen, Stoll) (Precedential) Overview: Collateral estoppel may apply if the claims “use slightly different language to describe substantially the same invention.” Facts/Procedural Posture: Hammond sued Google for infringing patents ’816 and ’483. In the ’483 patent, claim 18 required certain […]
Cupp Computing AS v. Trend Micro Inc. CAFC Opinion No. 20-2262, Decided November 16, 2022 (Dyk, Taranto, Stark)(Precedential) Overview: The Board is not required to accept a patent owner’s arguments during IPR as disclaimer, but those arguments will be binding in later proceedings. Facts/Procedural Posture: CUPP sued Trend Micro for infringing patents directed toward addressing the […]
In Re Planned Parenthood Federation of America 5th Cir. Case No. 22-11009, Decided October 31, 2022 (Elrod, Graves, Ho) Overview: The Fifth Circuit made some statements about its venue law that contradict the Federal Circuit’s recent interpretation of Fifth Circuit venue case law. Thus, transferring a case out of the Eastern and Western Districts of Texas […]