Home > Legal Library > Advanced Search > Search Results









Join Matindale-Hubbell Connected



Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP Boston, MA Document Search Results (12)

 

View Page: 1  2  Next  
Show: results per page
Sort by:
Sponsored Results

HTMLSour Grapes: When Can a Thief Spoil an Inventor’s Right to a Patent?
Thomas C. Carey; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
March 23, 2015, previously published on February 2015
Imagine that your company has developed a proprietary technology that it expects to license to several potential customers. The technology has great commercial potential but its use is not easy to detect. It may consist of a chip, embedded software, a manufacturing process, or even a medical...

 

HTMLSupreme Court Reins in the Federal Circuit on Patent Claim Construction, Resulting in Greater Clarity for Litigants
David E. Blau; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
March 23, 2015, previously published on February 2015
The Supreme Court recently issued its latest installment in a long-running debate over the deference that is due to a trial judge’s interpretation of patent claim language. The issue was whether the trial court’s interpretation can be reviewed entirely anew on appeal, or whether an...

 

HTMLHow Broadly Should Patent Claims Be Construed in Inter Partes Reviews? The Federal Circuit Enters the Debate
Robert M. Asher; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
March 23, 2015, previously published on February 2015
Challenges to issued U.S. patents have grown at an alarming rate since the advent of inter partes review (“IPR”) on September 16, 2012. IPR is a procedure introduced under the America Invents Act that allows for challenging the validity of an issued patent in the Patent Office rather...

 

HTMLDDR Holdings: The Federal Circuit Leaves a Software Patent Standing
Bruce D. Sunstein; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
March 23, 2015, previously published on February 2015
A recent decision by the Federal Circuit, DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., offers a glint of hope for protecting some software inventions after the same court’s discouraging decision in Ultramercial Inc. v. Hulu, Inc., which in turn followed the negative decision of the Supreme Court in...

 

HTMLYet Again, the Supreme Court Narrows Patent Eligibility, This Time Targeting Computer-Related Inventions
Bruce D. Sunstein; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
October 10, 2014, previously published on July 1, 2014
In the wake of its decisions denying eligibility for patent protection to diagnostic procedures (Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, 2012), and isolated genomic DNA (Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, 2013), the Supreme Court has denied patent eligibility to...

 

HTMLFTC Rule Targeting Pharma Licenses Is Upheld by Federal Judge
Jordana Goodman; Sunstein Kann Murphy Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
July 21, 2014, previously published on June 2014
Last November, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) announced a rule requiring advance notice of proposed exclusive patent license agreements in the pharmaceutical industry that exceed $75.9 million in value. Upon receipt of such a notice, the FTC or the Justice Department may then...

 

HTMLSupreme Court Sinks Nautilus, Reformulates the “Definiteness” Requirement for Patents
Thomas J. Tuytschaevers; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
July 21, 2014, previously published on June 2014
In yet another rejection of prevailing norms for determining patent validity, the U.S. Supreme Court refined the standard by which courts assess the clarity of patent claims. Until now, a patent claim was deemed insufficiently clear, and therefore invalid for indefiniteness, only if a court found...

 

HTMLSupreme Court Rejects Inducement Liability Where There’s No Direct Infringer
Kerry L. Timbers; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
July 21, 2014, previously published on June 2014
The issue of “divided infringement” — where multiple parties “share” infringement by performing different steps of a method claim — has vexed the courts of late, with the Federal Circuit see-sawing between two very different interpretations of the patent law. The...

 

HTMLThe Supreme Court Bans Aereo’s Service: An Odd Decision With an Odd Rationale
Timothy M. Murphy; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
July 21, 2014, previously published on July 1, 2014
Last week the Supreme Court decided, in American Broadcasting Companies, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc., that Aereo was infringing the copyrights of the television broadcasters. This decision was not a surprise in light of the comments of the justices during the April oral argument, which I discussed in...

 

HTMLContrary to Common Belief, Patents Can Survive Validity Challenges at the Patent Office
John J. Stickevers; Sunstein Kann Murphy & Timbers LLP;
Legal Alert/Article
June 3, 2014, previously published on May 2014
The America Invents Act, which went into effect September 2012, introduced new proceedings for challenging a patent before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Inter partes review (“IPR”) is one such proceeding. In the short time that IPRs have been available, more than 1000 petitions...

 


View Page: 1  2  Next