Source: http://www.jdsupra.com/topics/nautilus-inc-v-biosig-instruments/
Timestamp: 2014-09-02 22:37:24
Document Index: 426329044

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 285', '§ 112', '§ 101', '§ 112', '§112', '§ 112']

Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments | JD Supra
Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments News & Analysis as of September 2, 2014
Tweet Lessons from Nautilus v. Biosig at the Supreme Court Supreme Court's Decision on Indefiniteness Constitutes Basis to Reconsider Prior Claim Construction Order But Does Not Result in...
In this patent infringement action, Defendant Lighthouse Photonics Corporation's ("Lighthouse") moved to reconsider the Court's Claim Construction Order. Lighthouse argued three reasons for reconsideration: "first, Newport...more
by Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC on 7/21/2014
1) Does your U.S. Examiner assert that not enough representative species are described in the specification? MPEP Section 2163 II.A.3(a)(ii) says that “(t)he written...more
by Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 7/21/2014
New Nautilus Indefiniteness Standard Justifies Submission of Expert Evidence at Markman Hearing -
The court granted defendants' motion to supplement their claim construction briefing with an expert declaration...more
IP Quarterly - Summer 2014
- Supreme Court Hears Six Patent Cases This Term
- Is Implied License the New Fair Use?
- Navigating the Murky Waters of the Domestic Industry Requirements in the International Trade...more
Lessons from Nautilus v. Biosig at the Supreme Court [Video]
by Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on 7/7/2014
David K.S. Cornwell, director at the intellectual property law firm Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox, P.L.L.C., discusses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. He examines the...more
Rebalancing Indefiniteness: Nautilus v. Biosig
by Baker Botts on 7/3/2014
In a highly anticipated decision, the Supreme Court has rejected the Federal Circuit’s standard for indefiniteness – that a claim is indefinite only when it is not amenable to a construction or “insolubly ambiguous” – and...more
IP Buzz - June 2014
by Venable LLP on 7/2/2014
- Patent Reform: It's Alive!
- Nautilus: New Test, Same Application?
- Supreme Court Opens Door to Food and Beverage Label Challenges Under Lanham Act
- Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank:...more
Supreme Court Aiding Fight against Patent Trolls: Alice, Nautilus, Limelight, Octane Fitness and Highmark by Venable LLP on 7/1/2014
The Supreme Court may be making up for where Congress has left off. Legislation designed to curb abuse from patent assertion entities, or so-called patent trolls, has been shelved indefinitely. The legislation passed the...more
Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. -
Patent: Decided: April 29, 2014 -
Holding: A patent case is “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 when it “stands out from others with respect to the...more
Nautilus: New Test, Same Application?
In anticipation of Nautilus v. Biosig, many expected that the Supreme Court would relax the Federal Circuit's so-called "insolubly ambiguous" test for determining definiteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2. Under the Federal...more
Thoughts on Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l
by McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 6/20/2014
There's an old saying that "bad facts make bad law," acknowledging that a court's decision regarding an extreme case can result in law that poorly serves less extreme cases. The Supreme Court's recent trio of 35 U.S.C. § 101...more
Triton Tech of Texas, LLC v. Nintendo of America, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2014)
by McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 6/17/2014
A very experienced patent attorney once told me that you should never write means-plus-function claims unless there is a Luger at your temple. This, the first opinion addressing indefiniteness to come from the Federal...more
Further Guidance on Indefiniteness Following the Supreme Court's Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. Decision
by Faegre Baker Daniels on 6/16/2014
The Supreme Court's decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369 (2014) appeared to raise the bar for patent clarity. However, the true effects of the decision will not be seen for some time, if ever. In...more
The Potential Impact of Nautilus v. Biosig Instruments on AIA Trials by Venable LLP on 6/13/2014
The Supreme Court recently clarified the standard for determining invalidity of a patent claim for indefiniteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, second paragraph. Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., 572 U.S. _ (June 2,...more
by Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear LLP on 6/13/2014
In Nautilus, Supreme Court Relaxes Standard for Finding Patents Invalid for Indefiniteness
The U.S. Supreme Court, in Nautilus v. Biosig, recently reversed a Federal Circuit ruling that a patent is valid as long as the description of what it claims is not “insolubly ambiguous.” The Supreme Court’s decision, which...more
Supreme Court Sets Forth New Standard for Indefiniteness, Requiring Greater Precision in Claim Terms than the Standard Long Used...
by Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell LLP on 6/12/2014
For over a decade, to show that a claim term is invalid as indefinite under 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶2, the Federal Circuit has required that such terms be "not amenable to construction" or "insolubly ambiguous." The Supreme Court in...more
by Foley & Lardner LLP on 6/11/2014
On June 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., rejecting the Federal Circuit’s “insolubly ambiguous” test for patent claim indefiniteness under 35 USC § 112, and...more
Patent Law Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Makes It Easier to Knock out Vague Patents
Recently, the U.S. Supreme Court clarified the standard by which companies may seek to invalidate a patent for being overly vague, reversing a decision of the Federal Circuit regarding the definiteness standard of Section 112...more
Ruling unanimously twice in one day, the Supreme Court of the United States has issued two significant patent decisions that will significantly impact patent litigation in the future.
PatentsSCOTUSPatent LitigationPatent InfringementIndefinitenessClaim ConstructionInduced InfringementDefinitenessLimelight NetworksCLS Bank v Alice CorpAkamai TechnologiesHighmark v. AllcareOctane Fitness v. ICONLimelight v AkamaiDirect Infringement