In Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. [En Banc Opinion], Appeal Nos. 2015-1171, 2015-1195, 2015-1994, the Federal Circuit vacated the panel decision, reinstated Apple’s $120 million jury verdict, and remanded the willfulness issue for consideration under the Halo standard. At the district court, a jury awarded Apple nearly $120... read more →

In Synopsis, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., Appeal No. 2015-1599, the claims reciting a method related to circuit design were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The asserted method claims recite translating a functional description of a logic circuit (e.g., software code) into a hardware component description of the logic... read more →

In Massachusetts Institute of Technology v. Shire Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1881, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s conclusion that a clear and unmistakable prosecution disclaimer had not occurred during prosecution of a parent application and also affirmed that the term “three-dimensional” was not indefinite.   MIT sued Shire... read more →

In Poly-America, L.P. v. API Industries, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1200, the Federal Circuit affirmed a narrow claim construction based on a “clear and unequivocal” disavowal of claim scope in the specification and prosecution history. Poly-America sued API for infringing its drawstring trash bag patent.  The entry of judgment turned, in... read more →

In FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1985, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that FairWarning’s patent claimed patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. FairWarning sued Iatric Systems asserting its patent titled “System and Method of Fraud and Misuse Detection.” Specifically, the patent... read more →