By Annsley Merelle Ward On 22 May 2107, the US Supreme Court unanimously put limits on where patentees can commence patent infringement proceedings in the US.  In the case, TC Heartland challenged Kraft Heinz’s decision to commence patent infringement proceedings against it in Delaware, arguing that the case should be transferred to its home court in Indiana….

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board erroneously construed the term “aseptic” in an inter partes review (IPR) of a patent for a method of aseptically bottling sterilized food, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. The Board erred in construing the term as incorporating “any applicable United States FDA standard” rather…

To the extent that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not provide an explanation for its obviousness rejection of 13 claims of a Securus patent on a system and method for reviewing monitored conversations and identifying items of interest, the ruling was vacated and remanded by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal…

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…

In an inter partes review (IPR) proceeding challenging a SimpleAir patent that described a method of transmitting data to remote computing devices, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in concluding that IPR petitioner Google failed to establish that a combination of prior art references rendered the challenged claims unpatentably obvious, the U.S….

The federal district court in Wilmington, Delaware, did not abuse its discretion in finding that Bayer CropScience’s infringement suit against agrochemical rival Dow AgroSciences over soybean gene technology qualified as an “exceptional case” warranting an award of attorney fees under Section 285 of the Patent Act, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit…

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err when it concluded that the claims of a patent relating to the use of descriptive text combined with a rollover viewing area in the user interface of an Internet search engine were unpatentable as obvious in light of prior art, the U.S. Court of Appeals for…

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in finding that certain claims of Slot Speaker Technologies, Inc.’s sound reproduction system patent were invalid as obvious in light of prior art, according to the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit. However, the Board erred in holding that a third claim was not…

Pharmaceuticals company Watson’s proposed generic version of competitor Shire’s brand-name mesalamine LIALDA® did not satisfy the requirements for a Markush group claimed by a Shire patent, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held. A compound contained in the ANDA product—which was not present in the patent claim’s Markush group—structurally and functionally…

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…