PTAB.US: Decisions of PTAB Patent Trial and Appeal Board Updated Daily.

Search This Blog

Loading...

Tuesday, July 2, 2013

toshiba, lucent

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1615 Ex Parte Sikes et al 12133728 - (D) FREDMAN 103 VIDAS, ARRETT & STEINKRAUS, P.A. AL-AWADI, DANAH J

Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1746 Ex Parte Reineke 11776152 - (D) HOUSEL 103 WALKER & JOCKE HOOVER, MATTHEW

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3746 Ex Parte Losch et al 11522246 - (D) HOFFMANN 102/103 ABELMAN, FRAYNE & SCHWAB BAYOU, AMENE SETEGNE

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1721 Ex Parte Gao et al 11950196 - (D) PAK 103 112(1) SHARP LABORATORIES OF AMERICA, INC. C/O LAW OFFICE OF GERALD MALISZEWSKI JELSMA, JONATHAN G

1779 Ex Parte Drohmann et al 10509641 - (D) SMITH 103 NOVAK DRUCE CONNOLLY BOVE + QUIGG LLP POPOVICS, ROBERT J

1789 Ex Parte LI et al 12036438 - (D) FRANKLIN 112(2) 102/103 Matheson Keys & Kordzik PLLC MATZEK, MATTHEW D

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3665 Ex Parte Galbraith et al 11268691 - (D) FLOYD 103 Eckert Seamans Cherin & Mellott, LLC BROADHEAD, BRIAN J

3674 Ex Parte Babiarz et al 12023683 - (D) HOFFMANN 102 SCHWEGMAN, LUNDBERG & WOESSNER, P.A. PATEL, VISHAL A

3682 Ex Parte Rubie 11559803 - (D) MEDLOCK 103 Barnes & Thornburg LLP (CH) DURAN, ARTHUR D

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3733 Ex Parte Perez-Cruet et al 11738211 - (D) FREDMAN 103 MILLER IP GROUP, PLC MI4 SPINE, LLC COTRONEO, STEVEN J
 
FEDERAL CIRCUIT  

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2182 2306 CONVOLVE, INC. AND MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. COMPAQ COMPUTER CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee, AND SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, LLC AND SEAGATE TECHNOLOGY, INC., Defendant-Appellee. 2012-1074 6,314,473 09/262,781 4,916,635 07/243,315 O’MALLEY summary judgment (no induced infringement) 112(1) trade secret Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP; Bartlit Beck Herman Palenchar & Scott LLP original OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P.; CHOATE, HALL & STEWART LLP CAO, CHUN; MACDONALD, ALLEN R  

As we recently confirmed, when an alleged infringer “instructs users to use a product in an infringing way, there is sufficient evidence for a jury to find direct infringement.” Toshiba Corp. v. Imation Corp., 681 F.3d 1358, 1366 (Fed. Cir. 2012) (citing Lucent Tech., 580 F.3d at 1318). While a very close call, we find that Convolve presented enough evidence to preclude summary judgment on its inducement claims.

Lucent HARMON 15: 33

No comments :