Opinions Filed in August 2012

In re Applied Materials, Inc.

Simple determination of optimum ranges for operation, and development of more comprehensive explanations of variable relationship based on broad ranges of prior art, does not qualify as non-obvious.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

ActiveVideo Networks, Inc. v. Verizon Communications, Inc.

A JMOL for patent non-infringement must be supported with substantial evidence. Permanent injunctions on patent infringement cannot be upheld where losses are quantifiable based on lost license fees and damages are not irreparable harm.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Greenliant Systems, Inc. v. Xicor LLC

A patentee may enlarge the scope of his original claim only if by error he claimed less than he had a right to claim in the original patent.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Peters v. West

A strong evidentiary showing of the opportunity to copy a work does not lessen the plaintiff's burden to show a significant similarity between the copyrighted and offending works.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Golden Hour Data Systems, Inc. v emsCharts, Inc.

Clear and convincing evidence cannot be established upon successful claim reexamination when material is not deemed "but-for" material.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Perfect Pearl Co. v. Majestic Pearl & Stone, Inc.

Prior use of a mark in commerce is sufficient to earn trademark rights and trumps those rights in the marks that were later obtained by another by registering the marks.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

Hearthware, Inc. v. E. Mishan & Sons

Similarities in infomercials do not constitute copyright infringement when the similarities are standard components of infomercials.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Hearthware Inc. v. E. Mishan & Sons Inc.

If an allegedly infringing product owner does not make a literal lie in advertising the product, then there must be a showing of a likelihood of confusion.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

In re Beineke

An accidental seedlings discovery is not the product of the human inventive faculty.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Chicago Bldg. Design P.C. v. Mongolian House, Inc.

Although the courts should be reluctant to resolve religious property disputes, they may do so if the dispute can be resolved without consideration of doctrinal or other religious matters.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Copyright

Lopez v. Gap, Inc.

TRADEMARK; UNFAIR COMPETITION (Trademark infringement was not found when marks are not sufficiently distinctive and use primarily geographic terms.)

Area(s) of Law:
  • Trademarks

InterDigital Communications, LLC. v. International Trade Commission

The differentiation doctrine presumption is particularly strong in cases where a limitation is the sole differentiation between claims and one party is asserting a dependent claim on an independent claim.

Area(s) of Law:
  • Patents

Back to Top