Federal Circuit: December 2010 Archives
Federal Circuit - The FindLaw Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Opinion Summaries Blog

December 2010 Archives

Lazare Kaplan Int'l, Inc. v. Photoscribe Technologies, Inc., 09-1251

Patent infringement suit

Lazare Kaplan Int'l, Inc. v. Photoscribe Technologies, Inc., 09-1251, concerned a challenge to the district court's judgment in favor of the defendants, in plaintiff's suit for infringement of its patents, related to a system that uses a fixed laser to create a series of microscopic spots on the surface of gemstones.

 

Shum v. Intel Corp., 10-1109

Award of costs to both parties in a mixed-judgment case

Shum v. Intel Corp., 10-1109, In plaintiff's suit seeking correction of inventorship for patents originally issued to his former business partner, district court's award of costs to each party with respect to the claims on which they each prevailed is affirmed as, although, by definition under Rule 54(d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, there can be only one prevailing party, district court's alternate holding that defendants are the "prevailing party" within the meaning of Rule 54 is correct.

Related Link:

Shum v. Intel Corp., 09-1385

Action for correction of inventorship of patents

Shum v. Intel Corp., 09-1385, concerned a challenge to the district court's rulings in plaintiff's suit for correction of inventorship of patents that lists his former business partner as the sole inventor, and various claims under California law.

 

WiAV Solutions, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 10-1266

Issue of standing in patent infringement action

WiAV Solutions, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 10-1266, concerned a challenge to the district court's decision that plaintiff lacked constitutional standing to assert the Mindspeed patents against the defendants because several third parties have a limited right to license, in a patent infringement suit related to signal transmission, as well as encoding and decoding of data.

 

Spansion, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 09-1460

Patent infringement suit involving semiconductors

Spansion, Inc. v. Int'l Trade Comm'n, 09-1460, concerned a challenge to the International Trade Commission's final determination that defendants directly infringe the asserted claims of the '326 patent and contributorily infringe the asserted claims of the '419 patent, in plaintiff's suit under section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1990, claiming that seven defendants infringed its patents through the importation or sale of certain semiconductor chips or products containing such chips.


Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 09-1372

Content Delivery Network service provider's patent infringement suit

Akamai Technologies, Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc., 09-1372, concerned a challenge to the district court's judgment as a matter of law overturning a jury verdict of infringement by defendant of claims 19-21 and 34 of '703 patent and construction of certain claims of '645 and '413 patents, in plaintiff's suit for infringement of patents related to method claims directed to a content delivery services that delivers the base document of a web site from a content provider's computer while individual embedded objects of the website are stored on an object-by-object basis on a Content Delivery Network (CDN).



Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, 08-1403

Finding of invalidity of patents related to methods for determining optimal dosage of thiopurine reversed

Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services,08-1403, concerned a challenge to the district court's grant of summary judgment of invalidity of plaintiff's patents, related to claim methods for determining the optimal dosage of thiopurine drugs to treat gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal autoimmune diseases.

 

Chadwell v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 09-3302

Notice regarding an application for an administrative law judge position is not an employment action

Chadwell v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 09-3302, concerned a plaintiff's challenge to the Office of Personnel Management's (OPM's) notice that it would not review or process his 2008 application for an administrative law judge (ALJ) position because one year had not passed since the date he received a Notice of Results from his successful 2007 application for an ALJ position.  The court afifrmed the Merit Systems Protections Board's dismissal of the challenge, as the Board lacked jurisdiction because the OPM's one-year rule is not an employment action.

Related Link:

Arctic Slope Native Ass'n, Ltd. v. Sebelius, 10-1013

Indian tribe's suit against the Secretary of Health and Human Services for contract support costs

Arctic Slope Native Ass'n, Ltd. v. Sebelius, 10-1013, concerned an Indian tribe's suit against the Secretary of Health and Human Services for breach of contract, claiming that the government failed to pay plaintiff's so-called contract support costs shortfall for fiscal years 1999 and 2000.


Ladd v. US, 10-5010

Compensable taking claim against the United States

Ladd v. US, 10-5010, concerned a challenge to an order of the Court of Federal Claims granting summary judgment that no compensable taking occurred when the Department of Transportation's Surface Transportation Board (STB) issued a Notice of Interim Trail Use or Abandonment (NITU) concerning an easement over plaintiff's land.

Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. U.S., 10-1024

Antidumping case involving diamond sawblades from China and Korea

Diamond Sawblades Manufacturers Coalition v. U.S., 10-1024, concerned a challenge to the Court of International Trade's order issuing a writ of mandamus to the Department of Commerce directing it to issue antidumping duty orders and require the collection of cash deposits on certain diamond sawblades imported from China and Korea.

Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH v. Canady Tech. LLC, 08-1425

Patent infringement suit related to argon gas-enhanced electrosurgical products

Erbe Elektromedizin GmbH v. Canady Tech. LLC, 08-1425, concerned the parties' various challenge to the judgment of the district court, in a patent infringement suit involving three competitor companies that create argon gas-enhanced electrosurgical products for electrosurgery.

Research Corp. Technologies, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 10-1037

Patent infringement suit against Microsoft related to digital image halftoning

Research Corp. Technologies, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp., 10-1037, concerned a challenge to the district court's judgment in favor of Microsoft Corporation, in plaintiff's suit against Microsoft  for infringement of patents related to digital image halftoning.

 

W. Union Co. v. Moneygram Payment Sys., Inc., 10-1080

Patent infringement suit related to a system for performing money transfers

W. Union Co. v. Moneygram Payment Sys., Inc., 10-1080, concerned a challenge to the district court's judgment finding infringement of certain claims of plaintiff's patents, that those patents were not invalid for obviousness, and denial of defendant's renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law (JMOL) on infringement and invalidity of the asserted patents, in a suit for infringement of patents related to a system for performing money transfers. 

Horizon Lines, LLC v. US, 10-1138

Court of International Trade's determination that the government owed a refund to an operator of cargo ship for duties imposed

Horizon Lines, LLC v. US, 10-1138, concerned a challenge to the Court of International Trade's conclusion that the government owed an operator of cargo ship a refund for duties imposed on certain work performed on an ocean carrier while the ship was overseas.

Carrow v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 10-3061

Lack of jurisdiction in orthotist's appeal of termination of his employment with the DVA

Carrow v. Merit Sys. Prot. Bd., 10-3061, concerned a challenge to the the Merit Systems Protection Board's dismissal of the appeal, on remand, for lack of jurisdiction, in petitioner's challenge to the termination of his employment as an orthotist-prosthetist with the Department of Veterans Affairs (DVA).  In affirming, the court held that, by statute, petitioner's position with the DVA did not carry Board appeal rights, as he does not qualify as an "employee" under 5 U.S.C. section 7511(a)(1)(C)(ii).  Further, any failure on the part of the DVA to provide full information to petitioner regarding the terms of his employment with the DVA did not give the Board jurisdiction over his appeal seeking reinstatement to his position at the DVA.