|
November 13, 2008
Basell Poliolefine Italia, S.P.A. ("Basell") appeals from two decisions of the United States Patent and Trademark Office ("PTO") Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences ("Board") resulting from a Director-ordered reexamination of U.S. Patent 6,365,687 ("the `687 patent"). The Board affirmed the rejections of all the claims of the '687 patent as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102(b) and 103(a) and the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting....
|
|
November 13, 2008
National Semiconductor Corporation ("NSC") appeals the December 12, 2007 decision of the United States Court of International Trade awarding the government penalties under 19 U.S.C. § 1592(c)(4)(B) and prejudgment interest thereon for NSC's underpayment of merchandise processing fees. For the reasons set forth below, we affirm the Court of International Trade's penalty award but reverse the award of prejudgment interest... I. BACKGROUND... Between 1993 and 2000, NSC erroneously...
|
|
November 4, 2008
This case concerns the constitutionality of 10 U.S.C. § 2323 ("Section 1207"), which, in relevant part, (1) sets a "goal" that five percent of federal defense contracting dollars for each fiscal year be awarded to certain entities including small business concerns owned and controlled by "socially and economically disadvantaged individuals"; (2) incorporates the Small Business Act's presumption that Black Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and Native...
|
|
November 3, 2008
DBC, LLC ("DBC") appeals from a final decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences ("the Board"), which affirmed the examiner's rejection of all pending claims as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Ex parte DBC, No. 2007-1907 (B.P.A.I. Aug. 24, 2007) ("Decision"). Because substantial evidence supports the Board's determination that the claims would have been obvious, and because DBC has waived challenging the...
|
|
October 31, 2008
Mr. David Dean petitions for review of the decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board, Docket Nos. AT3443050147-M-1 and AT3443050179-M-1 (M.S.P.B. Dec. 6, 2007), denying his request for corrective action under the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA) and the Veterans Employment Opportunities Act of 1998 (VEOA). We affirm the decision of the Board... ... ... BACKGROUND... By letter dated April 30, 2004, Mr. Dean applied for the position of Products...
|
|
October 30, 2008
Dr. Kenneth Alonso appeals a decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences ("Board") sustaining in part the examiner's final rejection of claim 92 of U.S. Patent Application No. 08/469,749 ("`749 Application"). In its decision, the Board reversed the examiner's rejection of claim 92 for lack of enablement and sustained the rejection as invalid for lack of adequate written description. Ex parte Alonso, No. 2006-2148 (B.P.A.I....
|
|
October 21, 2008
This appeal is from the grant of a preliminary injunction, pending final resolution of the several challenges raised by Sandoz, Inc. to the validity, enforceability, and infringement of the Abbott Laboratories patents in suit.1 We conclude that abuse of... ... ... discretion has not been shown in the district court's decision to grant the injunction pendente lite. That decision is affirmed... BACKGROUND... This suit concerns two Abbott Laboratories patents on extended release formulations of...
|
|
October 20, 2008
Net MoneyIN, Inc. ("NMI") appeals from a final judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona, which held the asserted claims of U.S. Patents No. 5,822,737 ("the `737 patent") and No. 5,963,917 ("the `917 patent") invalid. NMI... ... ... also appeals from the district court's denial of its motion for leave to amend its complaint to assert a claim for inducement of infringement. Because the district court correctly found claims 1, 13, and 14 of...
|
|
October 17, 2008
This is a patent infringement case. Floyd M. Minks ("Minks") appeals from a final judgment that Polaris Industries ("Polaris") willfully infringed claim 2 of U.S. Patent No. 4,664,080 ("the `080 patent").1 After a jury trial, the district court reduced the jury's damages award from $1,294,620.91 to $55,809.60 (after doubling) and awarded attorney fees of $117,316.50, about half the requested amount. Minks appeals the reduction in damages, as well as the amount of...
|
|
October 15, 2008
This case under the Hatch-Waxman Act presents the issue of whether a settlement agreement between a patent holder and a generic manufacturer violates the antitrust laws. The agreements here involve a reverse payment from the patent holder to the generic manufacturer, but do not implicate the 180-day exclusivity period. Indirect purchasers of Cipro and several advocacy groups ("appellants") appeal the grant of summary judgment of their federal antitrust claims and dismissal of their...
|
|
October 14, 2008
The United States International Trade Commission ("ITC" or "Commission") determined that Qualcomm Incorporated ("Qualcomm") infringed Broadcom Corporation's ("Broadcom's") United States Patent 6,714,983 ("`983 Patent") with its imports. As a remedy, the ITC issued a limited exclusion order ("LEO") against the importation of all downstream products containing the accused technology. Aside from Qualcomm, the appellants in this action are Qualcomm's...
|
|
October 10, 2008
This is a patent case. It is not unusual for a patent case on appeal to turn more on a question of law or legal procedure than on the complexities of the particular technology that underlies the dispute. This is not such a case. This case has both legal issues and technical issues in roughly equal measure. There is, among other issues, a complex, though ultimately not difficult, question of allocation of the burdens of... ... ... proof between the patentee and the alleged infringer when...
|
|
October 9, 2008
James H. Hogan appeals a judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ("Veterans Court") affirming a decision of the Board of Veterans' Appeals that denied his claim for service connection for generalized anxiety disorder. Hogan v. Nicholson, No. 04-1336 (Ct. Vet. App. Jan. 30, 2007). We affirm... I... Hogan served on active duty in the military from August 1976 to July 1982, from September 1982 to September 1986, and from May 1987 to June 1990. In August... ......
|
|
October 9, 2008
When the complexities inherent in the English language meet the peculiarities of patent jargon, the result can be the bane of many unsuspecting patentees. While claim language is generally the product of the patentee alone, the patentee's drafting efforts are sometimes aided by the examiner. Usually, such collaborative efforts are constructive. On occasion, however, these efforts result in confusion, not clarity. In this case, there were two such occasions. The first was during the original...
|
|
October 9, 2008
Mr. Haas has sought rehearing of this court's decision in Haas v. Peake, 525 F.3d 1168 (Fed. Cir. 2008). This supplemental opinion is principally addressed to an issue that was raised for the first time in the petition for rehearing... ... ... In our original opinion in this case, we held that the Department of Veterans Affairs ("DVA") had reasonably interpreted 38 U.S.C. § 1116(a)(1)(A), which governs the provision of benefits to veterans who may have been exposed to Agent Orange...
|
|
October 8, 2008
Hartford Fire Insurance Company appeals the judgment of the United States Court of International Trade, finding no subject matter jurisdiction over its claim to find its surety bonds unenforceable. Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. United States, 507 F. Supp. 2d 1331 (Ct. Int'l Trade 2007). Because we agree that the true nature of the action is a failure to file an administrative protest to a demand for payment on a surety bond, we affirm... ... ... BACKGROUND... In February 2004, importer Brother...
|
|
October 7, 2008
Mathew R. Drake appeals a final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB or Board) finalizing an initial decision denying his request for corrective action. Drake v. Agency for Int'l Dev., 107 M.S.P.R. 251 (2007). Because the administrative judge (AJ) erred in concluding that Mr. Drake had not made a protected disclosure under 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(8), we reverse and remand... BACKGROUND... Mr. Drake, a Foreign Service investigator with USAID (agency), was assigned to the Regional...
|
|
October 7, 2008
This is a patent infringement case. Cohesive Technologies, Inc. ("Cohesive") brought three related actions accusing Waters Corporation ("Waters") of infringing U.S. Patent No. 5,772,874 (the "'874 patent") and U.S. Patent No. 5,919,368 (the "'368 patent"). In the first action, No. 98-CV-12308, Cohesive accused Waters's 30 µm Oasis high-performance liquid chromatography ("HPLC") columns (the "30 µm columns") of infringing the '874 patent....
|
|
October 3, 2008
The United States District Court for the District of Delaware held that United States Patent No. 5,236,940 (the `940 patent) does not qualify as an enabling prior art reference and thus does not anticipate claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 5,527,814 (the `814 patent). Because the trial court correctly determined that the `940 patent is not an enabling prior art reference and that it therefore does not anticipate claims 1-5 of the `814 patent, this court affirms... I... The `814 patent relates to...
|
|
October 1, 2008
The United States appeals the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims holding that the subsequent death of an otherwise eligible beneficiary before the government issues payment does not relieve the government of its obligation to pay benefits under the Public Safety Officers' Benefits Act (PSOBA), 42 U.S.C. § 3796, et seq. We affirm... BACKGROUND... Harold Ray Presley, a sheriff of Lee County, Mississippi, was fatally shot by a suspect during a police chase in July...
|