all - Opinion Summaries

INAMED CORP. v. KUZMAK

Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent
While a cease-and-desist letter alone is not sufficient for the exercise of personal jurisdiction in a patent case, telephone calls and letters...

BIOTEC BIOLOGISCHE NATURVERPACKUNGEN GMBH & CO. KG v. BIOCORP, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
The district court has no duty to search through lengthy technologic documents for possible evidence, and an expert's bare assertion that a patent is...

TEGAL CORP. v. TOKYO ELECTRON CO., LTD.

Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent
Injunctive relief against a patent infringer does not reach infringer's corporate affiliates, and merely permitting infringement does not amount to...

MCCOOK METALS LLC v. ALCOA, INC.

Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Patent
Where jurisdiction in an action is based in part on 28 USC 1338, which confers jurisdiction upon district courts in patent matters, review of an...

SHOCKLEY v. EXCALIBUR TOOL & EQUIPMENT CO., INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
New Rule 1.175, at 37 CFR 1.175, applies to patent reissue applications pending at the time the new rule became effective.

ALLARD ENTERS., INC. v. ADVANCED PROGRAMMING RES., INC.

Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Trademark
Defendants may not interpose a counterclaim for cancellation of plaintiff's federal trademark registration when the circuit court limited remand of...

ROBOTIC VISION SYS, INC. v. VIEW ENG'G, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
Whether or not the software needed to implement the claimed method existed at the time of the disclosure is irrelevant, where the offer to sell the...

INTELLECTUAL PROP. DEV., INC. v. TCI CABLEVISION OF CALIFORNIA, INC.

Intellectual Property, Patent
Where appellant maintains no "reasonable apprehension" that it will face an infringement suit from any successor in interest to the patent, it fails...

FOLEY v. LUSTER

Intellectual Property, Copyright
State common law claim for indemnification is not preempted by the Copyright Act.

OAK TECH., INC. v. INT'L TRADE COMM'N

Intellectual Property, Patent
Substantial evidence supports finding of patent noninfringement, and no violation of Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930, where plaintiff's CD-ROM...