Correspondent
White House correspondent, covers patent, trade and regulatory news
The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's rejection of a patent application for a cleated athletic shoe as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The court held that the claimed design, which features a concave depression to facilitate foot movement during exercise, was an unpatentable combination of prior-art references.
The Federal Circuit reversed the district court's exclusion of a patent damages expert report, ruling that the lower court misapplied precedent regarding royalty bases. The court held that using unaccused virtual machines as a royalty base was permissible where a causal connection existed between the patented technology and the increased capacity of those machines.
The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's judgment of no infringement, holding that patent claims listing elements separately require distinct physical structures. The court also upheld the construction of a term as means-plus-function, limiting the patent scope to specific disclosed structures that the accused device did not possess.
The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims. The court issued a per curiam judgment without providing a written opinion.
The Third Circuit affirmed the District Court's denial of sanctions against SeaWorld, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to impose penalties. The appellate court emphasized that decisions regarding litigation conduct sanctions are generally entrusted to the sound judgment of the trial court.
The Federal Circuit vacated the Veterans Court's decision and remanded the case because the lower court may have applied an incorrect legal standard regarding harmless error in a Total Disability based on Individual Unemployability claim. The appellate court held that the Veterans Court erred by assuming that a Board's identification of illustrative jobs is automatically harmless if the Board is not required to survey the actual job market.
The D.C. Circuit dismissed a petition for review of an SEC order approving a Fair Fund distribution because the petitioner lacked standing. The court held that the petitioner's alleged injuries stemmed from misconduct occurring after the period covered by the settlement, failing to establish the requisite causal connection.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for GEICO, holding that Idaho law treats the interpretation of an unambiguous insurance policy as a question of law. The court found no genuine issue of material fact because the insured was never legally obligated to pay damages, and the insurer had fulfilled its duty to communicate settlement offers.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's order compelling arbitration and dismissing the lawsuit, holding that a valid arbitration agreement existed under Arizona law and the Federal Arbitration Act. The court clarified that while the dismissal was correct, it should have been based on the merits rather than a lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
The Ninth Circuit affirmed a district court order confirming a foreign arbitration award. The court rejected the appellant's arguments regarding procedural defects and translation errors as frivolous.
