• All Courts
  • Federal Courts
  • Bankruptcies
  • PTAB
  • ITC
Track Search
Export
Download All
Active Filters1
Displaying 9-23 of 74,690 results

Lionra Technologies Limited v. Fortinet, Inc.

Docket 2:22-cv-00322, Texas Eastern District Court (Aug. 19, 2022)
District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, presiding, Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne
Patent
DivisionMarshall
FlagsCLOSED, JRG2, JURY, LEAD, PATENT/TRADEMARK, PROTECTIVE-ORDER
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Mediator Folsom David
Plaintiff Lionra Technologies Limited
Defendant Fortinet, Inc.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Tristar Products, Inc. v. Whelle LLC

Docket 1:22-cv-11301, Massachusetts District Court (Aug. 11, 2022)
Judge Denise J. Casper, presiding
Patent
DivisionBoston
FlagsPATENT
Cause15:1126 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Plaintiff Tristar Products, Inc.
Defendant Whele LLC
Defendant Whelle LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Wepay Global Payments LLC v. Bank of America N. A.

Docket 1:22-cv-00105, Illinois Northern District Court (Jan. 7, 2022)
Honorable Sara L. Ellis, presiding
Patent
DivisionChicago
FlagsAO279, CUMMINGS, PROTO, TERMED
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Plaintiff Wepay Global Payments LLC
Defendant Bank of America N. A.
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy A/S v. General Electric Co. et al

Docket 1:21-cv-10216, Massachusetts District Court (Feb. 8, 2021)
Judge William G. Young, presiding
Patent
03/30/2022
... to begin on May 3, 2022. If the criminal trial is moved or resolves prior to trial, this matter will proceed in May. (Court Reporter: None.) (Gaudet, Jennifer) (Entered: 03/31/2022)
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Askeladden LLC

Docket IPR2020-01415, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Aug. 7, 2020)
Nabeel Khan, Russell Cass, Steven Amundson, presiding
Case TypeInter Partes Review
Patent8112405
Petitioner Askeladden LLC
Patent Owner Lightwire
Patent Owner Dekel Shiloh
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Ravgen, Inc. v. Natera, Inc. et al

Docket 1:20-cv-00692, Texas Western District Court (June 1, 2020)
Judge Alan D Albright, presiding
Patent
DivisionAustin
FlagsPATENT
Cause35:271 Patent Infringement
Case Type830 Patent
Tags830 Patent, 830 Patent
Patent7332277; 7727720; 8010019, 7332277, 7727720, 8010019
Plaintiff Ravgen, Inc.
Defendant Natera, Inc.
Defendant NSTX, Inc.
...
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

Nonprecedential OPINION

Document Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Life Sciences Limited, 22-1605 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 21, 2024)
The ’413 patent thus im- plies that the benefit of backup support during delivery of an ICD occurs when the coaxial guide catheter is appropri- ately positioned, which is after the flexible tip portion is advanced.
The Board, relying on the testimony of Teleflex’s expert, found that inserting an ICD, as taught by Ressemann, through a suction catheter like Itou’s “would block Itou’s distal tip from properly interacting with and aspirating a thrombus or embolus” and would create a risk of patient harm.
To meet the limitation of inserting and advancing the ICD under the construction the Board adopted (which we have affirmed), Medtronic’s petition cited one paragraph in Kontos’s disclosure and expert tes- timony addressing the combination of Kontos and Adams.
The Board’s seemingly clerical error does not change the crux of its conclusion: that Medtronic cited no evidence establishing that Kontos discloses insert- ing the ICD after advancing the flexible tip portion.
Medtronic also argues that the Board applied the wrong obviousness standard by focusing on Kontos’s ex- press disclosures rather than the broader teachings of Kon- tos and a skilled artisan’s creativity and common sense.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

Precedential OPINION

Document Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Life Sciences Limited, 22-1721 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 16, 2023)
A method, comprising: advancing a distal end of a guide catheter having a lumen through a main blood vessel to an ostium of a coronary artery; ... Id. col. 13 ll. 62–65.
Specifically, the Board found that (1) the claimed invention was conceived before the critical date of Itou, id. at *14; (2) the claimed invention was actually reduced to practice before the critical date of Itou, id. at *19–25; and (3) the patent owner diligently pursued work on the inven- tion until its constructive reduction to practice through its effective filing in May 2006, id. at *25.
The Board, in part, adopted its analysis from another IPR decision on a related patent, Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Innovations S.Á.R.L., IPR2020-00132, Paper 127 at 58–67 (P.T.A.B. Jun.
In particular, it found a lack of motiva- tion to combine the references, ’1344 Decision at *14–15, 22–24, as well as a nexus to secondary considerations that weighed in favor of nonobviousness, id. at 15–22.
United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725, 733 (1993) (“Whereas forfeiture is the failure to make the timely assertion of a right, waiver is the ‘intentional relin- quishment or abandonment of a known right.’” (quoting Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 (1938)).
cite Cite Document
Analyze

GMG Products, LLC v. Traeger Pellet Grills, LLC

Docket PGR2019-00036, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Mar. 15, 2019)
Christa Zado, Debra Stephens, Josiah Cocks, presiding
Case TypePost Grant Review
Patent10158720
Patent Owner Traeger Pellet Grills, LLC
Petitioner GMG Products, LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

GMG Products, LLC v. Traeger Pellet Grills, LLC

Docket PGR2019-00035, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Feb. 26, 2019)
Christa Zado, Debra Stephens, Jameson Lee, Josiah Cocks, presiding
Case TypePost Grant Review
Patent10218833
Patent Owner Traeger Pellet Grills, LLC
Petitioner GMG Products, LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

GMG Products, LLC v. Traeger Pellet Grills, LLC

Docket PGR2019-00034, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Feb. 26, 2019)
Christa Zado, Debra Stephens, Jameson Lee, Josiah Cocks, presiding
Case TypePost Grant Review
Patent10218833
Patent Owner Traeger Pellet Grills, LLC
Petitioner GMG Products, LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

GMG Products LLC v. Traeger Pellet Grills LLC

Docket PGR2019-00024, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Dec. 18, 2018)
Christa Zado, Debra Stephens, Josiah Cocks, presiding
Case TypePost Grant Review
Patent10158720
Patent Owner Traeger Pellet Grills LLC
Petitioner GMG Products LLC
cite Cite Docket
Analyze

No. 5 ORDER dismissing appeal for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules; (no eoa, no ...

Document Wepay Global Payments LLC v. PNC Bank, National Association, 22-2268, No. 5 (Fed. Cir. Dec. 23, 2022)
Motion to Dismiss (Demurrer)Granted
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania in No. 2:22-cv-00592- MJH, Judge Marilyn J. Horan.
The appellant having failed to file the required Entry of Appearance form by an attorney admitted to the bar of this court, and having failed to file the brief required by Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the rules, it is
ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 2 ORDER Absent objection within seven days from the date of filing of this order, the court will ...

Document Medtronic, Inc. v. Teleflex Innovations S.A.R.L., 22-1605, No. 2 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 14, 2022)
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. IPR2020- 01341.
Upon consideration of this recently-docketed appeal,
Absent objection within seven days from the date of filing of this order, the court will revise the official caption and short caption to reflect Teleflex Life Sciences Limited MEDTRONIC, INC. v. TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.A.R.L.
cite Cite Document
Analyze

No. 57 MEMORANDUM AND OPINION (Motion(s) 26 terminated)

Document Dialect, LLC v. Bank of America, N.A., 2:24-cv-00207, No. 57 (E.D.Tex. Dec. 4, 2024)
Before the Court is Defendant Bank of America, N.A.’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss Dialect, LLC’s Amended Claims of Indirect and Willful Patent Infringement Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) (the “Motion”).
“A claim has facial plausibility when the plaintiff pleads factual content that allows the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged.” Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009).
As this Court has repeatedly recognized, “allegations that a defendant continues its allegedly infringing conduct even after receiving notice of a complaint are sufficient to at least state a claim for post-suit willful infringement.” Arigna Tech. Ltd. v. Bayerische Motoren Werke AG, 2:21-cv-00172-JRG, 2022 WL 610796, at *6 (E.D.
The Amended Complaint alleges that Defendant continues to actively encourage and instruct its customers to use the accused product in ways that directly infringe the asserted patents.
Failure to amend within fourteen days, or any period extended by the Court, shall constitute a substantive waiver and abandonment of such pre-suit willful, induced, and contributory infringement claims by Plaintiff.
cite Cite Document
Analyze
<< 1 2 3 4 5 ... >>