Yesterday, in two separate precedential decisions on mandamus, the Federal Circuit refused to overturn the district courts’ decisions not to transfer patent assertion entity cases to the defendants’ home forum: In re Apple, Misc. 13-156 (mandamus from E.D. Tex.) and In re Barnes Noble, Misc. 13-162 (mandamus from W.D. Tenn.).  Both mandamus orders were

Today, June 14, 2013, in Robert Bosch LLC v. Pylon Manufacturing Corp., No. 2011-1363, 1364, an en banc Federal Circuit ruled that parties can appeal a decision on liability in patent infringement cases before there has been a trial on damages or willfulness.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(c), the Federal Circuit has exclusive jurisdiction

On December 7, 2012, in Raylon, LLC v. Complus Data Innovations, Inc., No. 2011-1355, the Federal Circuit (Prost, Moore and Reyna) vacated a decision by the Eastern District of Texas that had denied Rule 11 sanctions based on a frivolous claim construction argument.  This case reflects a Federal Circuit response to concerns in the patent bar to deter frivolous suits and their attendant costs.
Continue Reading

Today, Thu., May 31, 2012, in Merial v. Cipla, No. 2011-1471, the Federal Circuit (Lourie, Schall (dissent) and Reyna) affirmed entry of contempt for violating an injunction that had been entered as part of a default judgment against a foreign defendant that had not contested the original action because that defendant believed personal jurisdiction was not properly pled or met.  This complex case provides insight into important procedural nuances of personal jurisdiction, default judgments, injunctions, intervention, contempt proceedings and risks thereof.  A quick summary of the case is provided below, which will be followed later by a more thorough analysis with explanatory diagrams.
Continue Reading

Today, Fri., May 4, 2012, in In re Misc EMC, Misc. No. 100, the Federal Circuit (Rader, Dyk and Moore) granted mandamus and ordered the  E.D. Tex. district court to reconsider its ruling that allowed joinder of 18 defendants based on a new “sameness test” for joinder (rejecting the district court’s “not dramatically different” test).  The new sameness test appears to limit joinder of multiple defendants in a single case, but the Court noted that cases still may be coordinated in a single court if venue is proper and that multidistrict litigation may be proper for pretrial issues of claim construction and patent invalidity.
Continue Reading

Today, Wed., Apr. 18, 2012, in Kappos v. Hyatt, No. 10-1219, the Supreme Court (Thomas) (Sotomayor and Breyer concur) affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling that permits new evidence in an appeal to a district court under Section 145 from an adverse Patent Office ruling on a patent application.
Continue Reading

On Wed., Mar. 7, 2012, in Digital Vending v. Univ. of Phoenix, No. 2011-1216, the Federal Circuit (Rader, Linn and Moore (dissent-in-part)) issued a split decision on whether there had been a clear disavowal of claim scope.  Judge Moore concluded that “[i]t is difficult to imagine a clearer case of disavowal.”  The Majority, however, found that “the careful distinctions in specification descriptions avoid any hint that the inventors clearly disavowed claim scope with respect to the method claims.”
Continue Reading