Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- an article about the Supreme Court “declin[ing] to consider an . . . argument that a ‘dangerous’ precedent will give big tech defendants a license to build inaccurate models of technology that can be used to wipe out patents asserted against them”;
- another article about a case involving the overturning of “a $308.5 million patent verdict against Apple”; and
- a third article explaining that “[a] potential import ban on the Apple Watch is still on the table.”
Kelcee Griffis authored an article for Bloomberg Law about the Supreme Court “declin[ing] to consider an Amazon.com Inc. challenger’s argument that a ‘dangerous’ precedent will give big tech defendants a license to build inaccurate models of technology that can be used to wipe out patents asserted against them.” Griffis reported how “[t]he justices on Tuesday rejected Innovation Sciences LLC’s petition for review, which asked them to weigh whether patent claims can be ‘anticipated,’ and thus invalid, without actual evidence that a relevant device existed before an invention’s ‘critical date.’”
Jasmin Jackson wrote an article for Law360 about a case involving the overturning of “a $308.5 million patent verdict against Apple over media management technology.” Jackson reported how the Federal Circuit “held that PMC caused unreasonable delays in the patent’s examination before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.” Jackson highlighted how PMC is now arguing that, if the judgment stands, “the panel’s decision will leave patents perpetually at risk of invalidation based on nothing more than ordinary persecution conduct.’”
Andrea Park wrote an article for Fierce Biotech explaining that “[a] potential import ban on the Apple Watch is still on the table as an International Trade Commission (ITC) ruling against the technology cleared presidential review this month.” Park reported how the potential ban is due to rulings holding “some Apple Watches infringe on AliveCor’s . . . patented portable ECG devices.” Park further explained how the ruling could have been “vetoed by the White House within 60 days,” but “the Biden administration has allowed the ruling to stand.”