Washington State Patent Law Blog: Patent Law

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Patent Law

Washington State Patent Law Blog

Patent law and litigation in Washington state or affecting industries in Washington state along with software, biotechnology, and patent reform.
By Mark Walters

Post Frequency: 1.4/day

Last Entry: March 17, 2010 at 21:54:00

Judge Jones Construes Claims in Toyota Hybrid Case

Posted on March 17, 2010
In a case that features Hollywood's David-versus-Goliath story of inventorship (for example see this link), independent inventor Conrad Gardner is suing Toyota for patent infringement of his U.S. Patent No. 7,290,627. The ?627 Patent covers hybrid vehicle technology for automobiles...

Goodbye and Thanks to Sam Darby

Posted on March 12, 2010
The son of James T. and Ellen Doran (Dunman) Darby, Sam Darby was born in Falcon, Arkansas, February 4, 1867. In the fall of 1882, he went to Annapolis, Maryland, as a cadet in the US Naval Academy. He left the Navy after graduation in 1886. Two years later, he started his undergraduate at Georgetown in Washington, D...

Cordance Wins JMOL in Amazon One-Click Patent Suit

Posted on February 22, 2010
Looks like local software company, Cordance may get a chance to have a jury determine the amount of damages Amazon owes for infringing certain patents covering aspects of the popular One-Click ordering system. In a case pending in USDC, District of Delaware, Cordance Corporation v...

Fed Cir. Reverses WDWA on Rare Interference Ruling

Posted on January 06, 2010
I previously posted about this case here, when Judge Pechman dismissed a suit brought by Philips Electronics seeking to overturn a ruling made in an interference. The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences had ruled an inventor at Philips Electronics, Morgan, was not the first to invent certain defibrillator methods claimed in US Patent No...

To access this complete feed in the blog feed reader login or register for free.

Federal Circuit Authorizes Qui Tam False Marking Cases

Posted on December 28, 2009

i4i Prevails on Appeal

Posted on December 22, 2009
Today, the CAFC decided the i4i appeal in what appears to be a sweeping victory for i4i. "We affirm the issuance of the permanent injunction, though we modify its effective date to accord with the evidence. In all other respects, we affirm for the reasons set forth below...

Federal Circuit Scraps Point of Novelty for Design Patents

Posted on December 22, 2009
I'm happy to report that the case I recently argued at the Federal Circuit resulted in new law for anticipation of design patents.� Here is the article written for Darby & Darby.� Articles have also appeared in the National Law Journal and IP 360 (subscriptions required for both)...

Implicit Networks Accuses Windows Seven of Infringement

Posted on December 08, 2009
If it wasn't any good, no one would be accusing it of infringement, right?� Unwelcome flattery of this nature was thrust upon Microsoft and its successful Windows Seven product last week when a patent infringement case was brought by local patent licensing company, Implicit Networks...

The True Cost of Discovery Disputes

Posted on December 07, 2009
"The parties have done their level best to avoid and undermine the purposes of the meet and confer requirements," was Judge Lasnik's opening sentence for a recent ruling granting in-part a motion to compel discovery filed by Defendants Industrial Ventilation, Inc...

Seattle Patent Litigation Update: December 2009

Posted on December 04, 2009
As we enter the last month of 2009, there is much to report on the state of local patent litigation. Here are some interesting orders that were issued over the past few months. On October 23, 2009, Judge Pechman stayed a patent case filed by National Products, Inc...

Revised Local Rules Become Effective December 1, 2009

Posted on November 24, 2009
The Western District adopted revised local rules, including some important revisions to CR 7, the rule governing motion practice.�� These revisions take place December 1, 2009.� Here is a summary of the changes to CR 7: CR 7(d)(1), the rule governing the consideration of motions and saying that certain motions shall be noted for consideration on the day they are filed, now expressly includes

Ancora Settles Litigation with Microsoft

Posted on November 19, 2009
I posted back in April about a lawsuit that was transfered to Seattle. The lawsuit was between Ancora Technologies and Microsoft.� Recently, Ancora sent out the�following press release. Seattle, WA (PRWEB) November 13, 2009 -- Ancora Technologies today announced that a settlement has been reached in the litigation between Ancora, Miki Mullor, and Microsoft, both in respect of the patent

Big Baboon Battles Bilski, Court Cites Morse Code

Posted on November 09, 2009
Debate over the patentability of process patents, particularly those having claims drawn to software inventions, continues to rage in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to accept certiorari in Bilski.� The state of the law is in flux.� Portfolios of patents hang in the balance while patent lawyers across the U...

Microsoft Denied Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction a Second Time

Posted on November 03, 2009
Microsoft was unable to sustain a declaratory action brought against WebXchange to invalidate three patents covering network services.� The patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Numbers 5,778,178; 6,212,556; and 7,340,506. According to IP 360, the USPTO has agreed to re-examine the '178 and '556 patents and has canceled the claims of the '506 patent...

Seattle Patent Litigation Update Fall 2009

Posted on October 24, 2009
Seeing that it has been almost a month since I last posted, I thought I needed to break the silence and provide an update on the world of Seattle patent litigation. For my part, things have been extremely busy over the last 30 days, which included a trip back to the CAFC to argue a design patent case, one of the first that might extend the Egyptian Goddess holding into determinations of

Oral argument audio available in i4i v. Microsoft

Posted on September 23, 2009
Audio files of today's merits argument in the i4i v. Microsoft appeal are available at the CAFC's website by following this link and this link.

Microsoft Files Reply in i4i Case

Posted on September 14, 2009
Microsoft filed its reply today to i4i's Brief in opposition to Microsoft's appeal. This brief does a good job trying to refocus attention to Microsoft's most winnable issues: (1) claim construction, (2) jury instructions, and (3) damages. The brief (correctly in my opinion) retreats from (abandons?) the "gatekeeper" theme that was so prevalent in Microsoft's opening brief...

CAFC: Jury's $360 M Damages Award Against Microsoft, In Favor of Lucent, Not Supported by Evidence

Posted on September 11, 2009
In a decision affirming the jury's finding of Microsoft's liability for infringement of Lucent's U.S. Patent No. 4,763,356, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("CAFC") reversed and remanded the damages award, which the jury had calculated to the penny, in the amount of $357,693,056...

i4i Files Response Brief at CAFC

Posted on September 10, 2009
Software maker and recently successful patent enforcer, i4i, filed its responsive brief yesterday in the appeal filed by Microsoft. In this high profile patent infringement case, Microsoft was found by a Texas jury to have infringed US Patent No. 5,787,449 on a method for reading XML, and ordered to pay over $280 M in damages for willful infringement...

i4i v. Microsoft: Injunction Stayed

Posted on September 03, 2009
Hal Wegner just reported that the CAFC will stay an injunction entered last month by Judge Leonard Davis of the ED of Texas. The injunction was to take effect October 10, 2009 and it was to apply against all copies of MS WORD currently being sold. The stay will be in place during the CAFC's consideration of Microsoft's appeal...

Microsoft Submits Opening Brief in i4i Appeal

Posted on August 26, 2009
Microsoft submitted its opening appeal brief on Tuesday and the CAFC set oral argument on its motion to stay Judge Davis' order enjoining further distribution of infringing copies of Microsoft's multi-Billion dollar WORD product. Oral argument on Microsoft's motion to stay and on Microsoft's motion for an expedited consideration of the appeal is set for September 23, 2009...

Nintendo Settles Patent Suit with Hillcrest

Posted on August 25, 2009
Nintendo has reached an agreement with Hillcrest Laboratories, Inc, signing a license agreement under three patents that are currently the subject matter of an ITC investigation. (For more, see my previous post here) On Friday, the companies filed a joint motion with the ITC, requesting dismissal in view of a settlement that resolved the ongoing dispute between them...

Ariad v. Lilly: Written Description Showdown at the CAFC

Posted on August 22, 2009
Yesterday the CAFC granted rehearing en banc in Ariad v. Lilly. The order poses two questions: 1. Whether 35 U.S.C. � 112, paragraph 1, contains a written description requirement separate from an enablement requirement? and 2. If a separate written description requirement is set forth in the statute, what is the scope and purpose of the requirement?The debate at the CAFC centers around whether

Judge Davis Orders Microsoft to Stop Selling Word

Posted on August 13, 2009
As many of you undoubtedly already know, Judge Leonard Davis granted plaintiff i4i's motion for a permanent injunction following a jury verdict in the case for infringement of US Patent No. 5,787,499, which covers software controlling document architecture and content and enables individuals to manipulate electronic documents without using manually embedded command codes (i...

Section 293 and Baseball

Posted on August 08, 2009
The following was written by my colleague, Darby & Darby principal, Steve Lipman.In my recent efforts to learn the name of the ?Section 293 Notice? representative of a client?s U.S. patent, I came upon the following incredible story. By the way, for those of you who may not know about a ?Section 293 Notice,? it is a provision of Title 35 that gives a foreign owner of a U...

Seattle Patent Litgiation Update: July 2009

Posted on August 06, 2009
There were three patent cases filed in July. Here they are.July 27, 2009F5 Networks Inc v. Kemp Technologies Inc. (Judge Jones) July 23, 2009Sharafabadi v. University of Idaho et. al. (Judge Robart) July 22, 2009Avtech Corporation v. Day-Ray Products Inc...

Inter Partes Reexamination: When is a Final Ruling "Finally Determined"

Posted on August 04, 2009
The following case addresses the under appreciated concept of estoppel from so-called "final" rulings in an inter partes reexamination. In Safoco, Inc v. Cameron Int. Corp. (USDC SD Texas H-05-0739), the US District Court for the Southern District of Texas addressed when estoppel attaches to a "final" ruling at the PTO in an proceeding for inter partes reexamination...

Court Refuses to Vacate Markman Ruling Following Settlement

Posted on July 31, 2009
In the case Unigen Pharmaceuticals v. Walgreen Co. (07-471 RAJ), which is actually a consolidation of three cases brought by plaintiff Unigen, asserting infringement of US Patent No. 7,192,611 (for more on the consolidation, click here), the parties recently settled and approached the court jointly to dismiss the case and to also vacate a prior claims construction ruling...

Who Is Big Baboon Inc.?

Posted on July 29, 2009
A number of my readers have contacted me looking for information about Big Baboon, Inc. Here is what I know. According to its complaint filed against Dell, Amazon, HP, Fed Ex, Honda, and others, it owns 6,115,690 and 6,343,275, patents for "Integrated Business-to-Business Web Commerce and Business Automation...

Cordance v. Amazon: Summary Judgment a Mixed Bag

Posted on July 28, 2009
Amazon recently lost its motion for summary judgment on several patent infringement claims brought by Cordance Corp. in the companies? dispute over online purchasing technology. Cordance?s patents-in-suit are U.S. Patent Numbers 6,757,710; 6,044,205; 5,862,325; and 6,088,717...

Related Law Bulletins

Case Law Development: Allegations of Wife's Attempted Murder of Husband Do Not State a Claim for Terminating His Maintenance Obligation
The Missouri Supreme Court affirms the dismissal of an ex-husband'...

When Government Inversely Condemns Property by Regulation, Magnitude of State Interest Has No Bearing Upon Just Compensation
The New Jersey Supreme Court recently decided a case in which a p...

Case Law Development: Constitutional Challenge to Paternity Laws Dismissed For Failure to State Claim
A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals uphel...

French Court Finds Favorable Lease To Mosque Violates Church-State Limits
In France, the Marseille administrative court on Tuesday ordered r...