Author Archives: Steven Callahan

Make Sure To File A Reply Brief

I just came across Judge Lindsay’s Order in Martin v. Trend Personnel Services (available here), which provides two pieces of important guidance: 1. File a reply brief: “The court notes that Defendants filed no reply. A reply should always be filed, … Continue reading

Posted in Judge Lindsay, Practice Tips | Comments Off on Make Sure To File A Reply Brief

Supreme Court Rules Belief Of Invalidity Is Not A Defense To An Induced Infringement Claim

Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Commil v. Cisco (available here). The Court reversed the Federal Circuit, and held that a defendant’s belief regarding patent validity is not a defense to a claim of induced infringement. This is … Continue reading

Posted in Developing Law | Comments Off on Supreme Court Rules Belief Of Invalidity Is Not A Defense To An Induced Infringement Claim

Alice: The Death of Software-Related Patents?

In June 2014, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014) (available here). At issue was whether the patents-in-suit—which disclosed a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating “settlement risk” (the … Continue reading

Posted in Developing Law | Comments Off on Alice: The Death of Software-Related Patents?

Recent Supreme Court Decisions of Note

Here are four relatively recent Supreme Court decisions of note to federal court and IP practitioners: American Broadcasting Cos. v. Aereo: the Supreme Court held that Aereo infringes copyright owners’ exclusive right “to perform the copyrighted work publicly” by “by … Continue reading

Posted in Developing Law | Comments Off on Recent Supreme Court Decisions of Note

New Northern District of Texas Patent Lawsuits

Over the last several weeks, there have been many new patent suits filed in the Northern District of Texas, including: BSN SPORTS v. Bensussen: plaintiff asserts that defendant is infringing U.S. Patent No. 6,308,381, through the sale of products, including … Continue reading

Posted in New Lawsuits Filed | Comments Off on New Northern District of Texas Patent Lawsuits

Judge O’Connor’s Recent Summit 6 Decisions

Over the last several months, Judge O’Connor has issued at least three opinions in the Summit 6 case. First, a 58 page claim construction opinion (available here) construing claim terms. Second, a decision granting in part and denying in part Summit … Continue reading

Posted in Judge O'Connor | Comments Off on Judge O’Connor’s Recent Summit 6 Decisions

Judge Kinkeade Severs and Stays Patent Infringement Claims Against Retailer Defendant

On March 18, 2015, Judge Kinkeade issued an Order (available here) in Richmond v. Forever Gifts. Defendants requested that the Court sever and stay Plaintiff’s claims against Walgreen (the retailer of the accused product) pending final resolution of Plaintiff’s claims against … Continue reading

Posted in Judge Kinkeade | Comments Off on Judge Kinkeade Severs and Stays Patent Infringement Claims Against Retailer Defendant

Judge Lynn Stays Merits Discovery Pending Resolution of Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue

In Heat On-The-Fly v. Enervco, Judge Lynn entered an Order (available here) staying merits discovery pending the Court’s resolution of defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue: In light of the fact that the Court … Continue reading

Posted in Judge Lynn | Comments Off on Judge Lynn Stays Merits Discovery Pending Resolution of Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue

Judge Kinkeade Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction In Patent Case

In Mannatech v. Wellness Quest, the plaintiff sued defendants asserting infringement of two patents. The plaintiff then moved for a preliminary injunction and expedited discovery. Judge Kinkeade issued an Order (available here) rejecting the plaintiff’s requests. The Court premised its … Continue reading

Posted in Judge Kinkeade | Comments Off on Judge Kinkeade Denies Motion for Preliminary Injunction In Patent Case

“Close Call” In Terms of Infringement and Validity Precludes Willfulness Claim In Patent Case

On March 9, 2015, Judge Lynn issued an Order (available here) in Melchior v. Hilite International. The Court found that a “close call” in terms of infringement/invalidity issues precluded the plaintiff’s willfulness claim: Specifically, the Court found Plaintiff did not meet … Continue reading

Posted in Judge Lynn | Comments Off on “Close Call” In Terms of Infringement and Validity Precludes Willfulness Claim In Patent Case