In a patent infringement suit brought by Omega Patents against CalAmp Corp. alleging infringement of Omega’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,346,876 (’876 patent), 6,756,885 (’885 patent), 7,671,727 (’727 patent), and 8,032,278 (’278 patent), the federal district court in Orlando’s judgment of no invalidity of the asserted claims was affirmed, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the…

In a challenge to Facebook’s patent application for a method for arranging images contiguously in an array, a prior art reference—a patent application filed by Perrodin that related to placing images on a grid and did not require contiguity in response to resizing or rearranging in all cases—could not have disclosed the limitation of Facebook’s…

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board correctly determined that claims 1-8 of a patent for a method for drilling holes for dental implants, held by Sirona Dental Systems GmbH, were unpatentable as obvious in light of prior art, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled. Further, the petitioners, Institut Straumann AG…

In an interference proceeding, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board correctly determined that claims 65-67 of applicant General Hospital Corporation’s (GHC’s) U.S. Patent Application No. 13/789,575 for methods of removing hair by using nanoparticles to damage hair follicles lacked sufficient written description under § 112 of the Patent Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for…

In a dispute between patent holder B/E Aerospace and C&D Zodiac that was instituted by C&D’s petition for inter partes review of B/E’s patent for saving space in airplanes, the Patent trail and Appeal Board did not err in concluding that claims 1, 3–7, 9, 10, 12–14, 16–19, 21, 22, 24–29, 31, and 33–37 of…

The federal district court in Tyler, Texas, correctly denied Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L.’s (“Core Wireless’s”) motion for judgment as a matter of law that Apple infringed a claim of a Core Wireless patent directed to a means for sending packet data from a mobile station such as a cellular telephone to a cellular system or…

Two patents directed to a method for the electronic trading of stocks, bonds, futures, and options asserted by Trading Technologies International (TTI) against the CQG companies were not directed to an abstract idea and also recited an inventive concept, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled. In affirming a federal district…

The federal district court in Tyler, Texas, correctly construed the term “mountable” in a patent for a digital picture frame asserted by Profectus Technology against the manufacturers and sellers of tablet computer devices as “having a feature for mounting,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ruled (Prospectus Technology LLC v. Huawei…

The federal district court in Houston did not abuse its discretion in enforcing a forum selection clause between Wellogix, on one side, and SAP America, Inc. and SAP AG (collectively, “SAP”) on the other, in holding that trade secret claims brought by Wellogix against SAP were required to be dismissed because they were subject to…

In finding that all of the claims of Cutsforth’s U.S. Patent No. 7,990,018 (“the ’018 patent”) were obvious in light of the prior art, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in failing to explain its reasoning, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has decided (Cutsforth, Inc. v. MotivePower, Inc., January 22,…