Other Cases to Watch

Search By
Status
Subject
70 Cases
Appeal No.
Case
Subject
Status
Issue(s) Presented
Appeal No.
18-1614
Subject
Patent4 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the district court erred, as a matter of law, in dismissing Syngenta’s copyright claims, because the district court’s holding that FIFRA precludes copyright actions based on copying of...
Appeal No.
18-1363
Subject
Patent10 Amici
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the district court erred in denying Ericsson a jury trial in a declaratory-judgment suit that anticipated, and shared issues with, Ericsson’s patent-infringement suit.” 2. “Whether the district court erred...
Appeal No.
19-1050
Subject
Patent
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the infringement judgment for the ’135 and ’151 patents should be reversed or vacated because: (a) redesigned VPN On Demand does not ‘automatically initiate’ a VPN based on...
Appeal No.
19-1246
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“Did WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., 138 S. Ct. 2129 (2018), which held that a patent holder may recover lost profits damages from foreign sales under 35 U.S.C. §...
Appeal No.
2018-2248, -2249
Subject
Procedure
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“An involuntary dismissal is an extreme sanction reserved for an incorrigible plaintiff that has failed to comply with case deadlines to the demonstrated prejudice of a diligent defendant. Here the...
Appeal No.
2018-2008, -2009, -2010, -2011
Subject
Patent
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the Board erred in concluding the patent claims at issue are unpatentable, by failing to properly apply its own adopted claim construction.” 2. “Whether the Board erred by refusing...
Appeal No.
2018-1763
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the district court erred in determining on summary judgment that the claims in U.S. Patent No. 7,774,911 are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claiming patent ineligible subject...
Appeal No.
18-2069
Subject
TrademarkAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
“Whether the Board erred in ruling that FCA’s MOAB trademark, as shown in the Application and when used in connection with goods identified in the Application, so resembles the Cited...
Appeal No.
18-2214
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the District Court committed reversible error by limiting the scope of the ’946 Patent claim to a ‘chair’ embodying the design illustrated in the patent figures based on...
Appeal No.
18-1367
Subject
PatentAmicus
Status
Decided
Issue(s) Presented
1. “Whether the district court erred in immunizing from antitrust scrutiny patent acquisitions that violate Section 7 of the Clayton Act because some of the patents were later asserted in...