VirnetX Attacks Apple’s PTAB Win At Fed. Circ. – Andrew Karpan reported for Law360 on VirnetX’s attempt to overturn a Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruling that if affirmed would undermine its $576 million patent infringement judgment against Apple.
Marathon, Others Defend Patent Case Fee Award at Federal Circuit – In her article on Bloomberg.com, Perry Cooper discusses a three judge panel of the Federal Circuit who “listened to arguments about a $5 million attorneys’ fee award in a fracking patent case.”
Last Week in the Federal Circuit (June 1-4): Prosecution Disclaimer – What’s Good for the Goose… – In this post on FederalCircuitry, Rachel Rice picked opinions released by the Federal Circuit that have “piqued [her] interest” to discuss.
VirnetX Attacks Apple’s PTAB Win At Fed. Circ.
In an article highlighting the filing of a recent brief, Law360 explained that “VirnetX has urged the Federal Circuit to throw out a Patent Trial and Appeal Board ruling from last year that invalidated network security patents.”
Marathon, Others Defend Patent Case Fee Award at Federal Circuit
In an article on Bloomberg.com, Perry Cooper writes about a recent case argued in front of the Federal Circuit, Energy Heating, LLC v. Heat On-The-Fly, LLC, observing that “[a] three-judge panel of the Federal Circuit appeared unconvinced by arguments that Marathon Oil Co. and others involved in hydraulic fracturing operations were improperly awarded $5 million in attorneys’ fees in a patent case.” Cooper explains that “Chief Judge Kimberly A. Moore and Judges Sharon Prost and Kara F. Stoll all questioned whether a trial court is only permitted to find a case exceptional and worthy of attorneys’ fees where there is litigation misconduct.”
Last Week in the Federal Circuit (June 1-4): Prosecution Disclaimer – What’s Good for the Goose…
In this blog post, Rachel Rice discussed recent opinions issued by the Federal Circuit and their implications. She especially focused on SpeedTrack, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., which Rice said should be read by those who “have a matter involving claim construction after an alleged prosecution disclaimer.”