Category Archives: Patent

Collecting Info vs Using Info

In Weisner v. Google LLC, No. 21-2228, — F.4th — (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2022), the Federal Circuit held that method claims directed toward collecting information are abstract ideas, while method claims directed toward using the information are patent eligible. Weisner had sued Google for infringing a family of four patents, namely, U.S. Patent Nos. […]

Read More

No Remote Working Mandamus Yet

A writ of mandamus may be filed to appeal a district court’s refusal to dismiss or transfer a patent lawsuit based on venue. But the nature of mandamus relief is limited. For venue disputes under 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b) for patent cases, mandamus is available where immediate intervention is necessary to assure proper judicial administration. […]

Read More

“Action” of “Withholding” Claims in Patent Prosecution

A pre-GATT patent application, i.e., filed prior to June 8, 1995, would be entitled to a patent term of seventeen years from the date of issuance. Otherwise, the issuing patent would be entitled to a patent term of twenty years from the earliest claimed filing date (and 1995 is more than twenty years ago). That […]

Read More

Duplicative-Litigation Doctrine Against the Same

The duplicative-litigation doctrine prevents plaintiffs from “maintain[ing] two separate actions involving the same subject matter at the same time in the same court . . . against the same defendant.” Walton v. Eaton Corp., 563 F.2d 66, 70 (3d Cir. 1977) (en banc). In patent infringement cases, whether patent-infringement complaints involve the same subject matter (such as […]

Read More

Following the Corpus of § 101 Jurisprudence

The Supreme Court has long held that “[l]aws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable” under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 216 (2014) (quoting Ass’n for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 569 U.S. 576, 589 (2013)). In Alice, 573 U.S. at 218, and […]

Read More