Posts in Courts

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today affirmed the dismissal of a pro se patent owner’s claims against Live Nation, Ticketmaster, Major League Baseball and several law firms, concluding that the plaintiff waived her appellate arguments by failing to oppose the defendants’ dismissal motions in district court.

In patent damages, apportionment reflects the fundamental principle that a patentee may recover only the value attributable to the patented invention, not the value of unpatented features or components. In practice, this means that damages must be tied to the incremental contribution of the patented technology to the accused product. The entire market value rule (EMVR) is a doctrine in patent damages, in particular, reasonable royalty damages, that operates as a narrow “exception” to the apportionment principle.

For companies in many industries, their most valuable trade secrets reside not in a single formula or document, but in years of accumulated data, coordinated processes, and combinations of technical and commercial information from various internal sources. Engineering know-how (including negative know-how), integrated software features, and customer databases can reflect years of investment and work effort and give competitors a shortcut if acquired improperly and used. Compilation and combination trade secret protection helps safeguard that collective value, even when some individual components are publicly known or unprotectable standing alone.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Thursday denied two petitions for writ of mandamus arguing the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia abused its discretion in transferring three related patent infringement suits to the Northern District of Illinois.

Many intellectual property rights peacefully coexist because they apply to distinct aspects of a product. Issues can arise when intellectual property rights that expire and intellectual property rights that do not expire protect the same or overlapping features of the same product. One example is design patents and trade dress rights, both of which apply to non-functional ornamental features.

The U.S. Supreme Court issued an order on Monday in BMG Rights Management (US) LLC v. Vetter affirming the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s judgment granting a songwriter ownership of the worldwide copyright in “Double Shot (Of My Baby’s Love).” The Court entered the affirmance under 28 U.S.C. Section 2109, following a September 30 reply in which BMG Rights Management (US) LLC and the other petitioners urged the Court to grant certiorari and reverse.

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order list that included a denial of Google’s petition for writ of certiorari challenging the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) development of settled expectations doctrine at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). This latest setback to industry-wide efforts opposing the duration of a patent’s life in force as a consideration leading to discretionary denials of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings comes a few weeks after the U.S. Solicitor General urged denial of Google’s cert petition, agreeing with the Federal Circuit that such a challenge was not available on mandamus review.

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday denied certiorari in Frederick L. Allen, et al. v. Joshua Stein, Governor of North Carolina, a decade-plus long case that led to a Supreme Court decision as well as the introduction and subsequent repeal of a law to shield North Carolina from copyright liability. In January 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit issued the most recent ruling in the case, which related to Frederick (“Rick) Allen’s copyright battle against the State of North Carolina over documentary footage of a state-sponsored salvage project exhuming a shipwreck associated with the famed pirate, Blackbeard. Videographer Frederick Allen and his company Nautilus Productions recorded footage of a private company’s project to salvage Blackbeard’s flagship Queen Anne’s Revenge from the North Carolina coastline.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision today in Google LLC v. Valtrus Innovations Ltd., affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) final written decision that found Google did not demonstrate the unpatentability of claims 1 through 23 of a patent on merging search-result lists. The court rejected arguments that the Board relied on legally insufficient evidence to corroborate an inventor’s conception testimony and that substantial evidence did not support a finding of reasonably continuous diligence.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision Friday in Linden v. ResMed, Inc., affirming a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California that dismissed a patent infringement lawsuit after finding the asserted claims ineligible under 35 U.S.C. Section 101. Craig L. Linden argued that the district court erred in treating Claim 1 as representative at each step of the eligibility analysis.

An Ohio judge has ruled that Amazon must face trial on claims that its Merch on Demand service directly and vicariously infringed an apparel company’s copyrights, although the company’s contributory-infringement claim was dismissed. In an October 14 opinion, U.S. District Judge Douglas R. Cole of the Southern District of Ohio denied Amazon and plaintiff Weekend Warrior Clothing LLC—a T-shirt company founded by two brothers—summary judgment on most of their competing claims.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Wednesday affirmed a decision for Hulu, LLC that dismissed a patent infringement suit brought by Piranha Media Distribution LLC because the asserted claims were found to be patent ineligible. The opinion was authored by Judge Cunningham. Piranha claimed that Hulu infringed its U.S. Patent Nos. 10,986,403 and 11,463,768, which relate to systems for integrating advertisements in digital media. The U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted Hulu’s motion to dismiss the complaint, finding that the claims were not directed to patent eligible subject matter.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Syngenta Crop Protection AG v. UPL Ltd., affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) final written decision that held all challenged claims of a fungicide combination patent unpatentable. The CAFC rejected arguments from UPL Ltd. and affirmed the PTAB’s denial of leave for Syngenta Crop Protection AG to seek sanctions.

Today, the United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office (UKIPO) issued a press release announcing a series of measures designed to create guidelines and administrative procedures for increasing transparency and efficiency surrounding the licensing of standard-essential patents (SEPs). The long-awaited announcement brings some relief to SEP owners concerned about the prospects of proposed SEP royalty rate proceedings and mandated disclosures, though the UK government still intends to “explore the introduction of a court-anchored” proceeding for determining fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing obligations early in patent infringement proceedings in UK courts.