March 2013
Device Merely Capable of Infringement with Alteration Does Not Necessarily Infringe
[Appealed from S.D. Tex., Judge Hughes]
Sufficient Controversy Exists for DJ Jurisdiction Where Patentee Had Accused DJ Plaintiff of Misappropriating Same Technology in Related Litigation
[Appealed from E.D. Penn., Judge Yohn]
No Federal Cause of Action Based on Assignor Estoppel
[Appealed from N.D. Cal., Judge Breyer]
O2 Micro Does Not Apply When Jury Explicitly Told by Court to Use Only the Court’s Claim Construction
[Appealed from E.D. Tex., Magistrate Judge Everingham IV]
To Prove Lack of Enablement, the Challenger Must Present More Than Mere Unsubstantiated Expert Testimony That Undue Experimentation Is Required to Practice the Invention
[Appealed from D. Del., Judge Robinson]
A Claim Element Is Vitiated If No Equivalent Exists in an Accused Infringing Device Based on Either the “Function-Way-Result” or “Insubstantial Differences” Tests
No. 12-1018 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 20, 2013)
[Appealed from N.D. Cal., Judge Wilken]
Abbreviations | |
ALJ | Administrative Law Judge |
ANDA | Abbreviated New Drug Application |
APA | Administrative Procedures Act |
APJ | Administrative Patent Judge |
Board | Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences |
Commissioner | Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks |
CIP | Continuation-in-Part |
DJ | Declaratory Judgment |
DOE | Doctrine of Equivalents |
FDA | Food and Drug Administration |
IDS | Information Disclosure Statement |
ITC | International Trade Commission |
JMOL | Judgment as a Matter of Law |
MPEP | Manual of Patent Examining Procedure |
NDA | New Drug Application |
PCT | Patent Cooperation Treaty |
PTO | United States Patent and Trademark Office |
SJ | Summary Judgment |
TTAB | Trademark Trial and Appeal Board |