McCracken & Frank releases case summaries to address and summarize important legal decisions out of the Court system. None of the case digests are legal advice and should not be acted upon as such. You are welcome to forward on case digests as long as the originals have not been modified.
Recent Federal Circuit & Supreme Court intellectual property cases of note
In re Erik P. Staats and Robin D. LashL: Broadening claims after Section 251 two-year period
Ex parte Sylvain Henry, et al.: 103 obviousness rejection requires factual support
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories: 35 U.S.C. 101 Patent Eligibility
Spectralytics, Inc. v. Cordis Corp.: Failure to consult with legal counsel may affect damages
CyberSource v. Retail Decisions.: Underlying invention determines Beauregard claim patentability
Forest Group v. Bon Tool: The Federal Circuit on False Marking
CoreBrace v. Star Seismic, No. 2008-1502 (Fed Cir. May 22, 2008).
Cardiac Pacemaker v. St. Jude: 35 U.S.C. 271(f) inapplicable to method claims
Quanta Computer v. LGE Electronics: Patent Exhaustion
In re Seagate Technology, LLC
KSR International Co. v. Teleflex, Inc.: Obviousness Analysis and the TSM Test
In re Seagate Technology, LLC: The CAFC Revisits In re Echostar
Will Motivation or Suggestion to Combine References in Obviousness Cases Survive Supreme Court Scrutiny? (an analysis of the issues raised in the KSR Supreme Court hearing)
Amgen v. Aventis Pharmaceuticals (Ed O'Toole of McCracken & Frank LLP was on the petition)
Alza Corp. v. Mylan Laboratories, Inc.
Primos, Inc. v. Hunter's Specialties, Inc.: Tangential Relationship Exception to Prosecution History Estoppel
In Re: EchoStar Communs. Corp.: Uncommunicated Law Firm Work Product Protected When In-House Privilege Waived
Bruckelmyer v. Ground Heaters, Inc.: Foreign File Wrapper is a Printed Publication
Golden Blount, Inc. v. Robert H. Peterson Co.: Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege
JVW Enterprises, Inc. v. Interact Accessories, Inc.: Means-Plus-Function Claim Construction
Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Bio-Technology General Corp.: Inequitable Conduct
Cross Medical Products, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc.: Motivation to Combine Found in Old Problem
Capon v. Eshhar: Written Description Under 35 U.S.C. §112, First Paragraph
Terlep v. Brinkmann Corp.: Claim Construction
Datamize v. Plumtree Software: Claim Indefiniteness Under 35 U.S.C. §112, Second Paragraph
NTP Inc. v. Research In Motion Ltd.: Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. §271
Phillips v. AWH Corp.: Claim Construction
Electromotive Div. of Gen. Motors Corp. v. Transp. Sys. Div. of Gen. Elec. Co.: Experimental Use Exception to 35 U.S.C. 102(b) "On-Sale Bar"
Rasmusson v. SmithKline Beecham Corp.: Enablement Under 35 U.S.C. §112, First Paragraph
Teleflex, Inc. v. KSR International, Co.
Integra v. Merck: Experimental Use Safe Harbor Under 35 U.S.C.