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.
In reversing the district court's judgment, the court held that the asserted claims of the '203, '747, and '309 patents would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of filing as a matter of law. The court also held that the the district court erred in its analysis of secondary considerations of obviousness and its heavy reliance on them in denying defendant's JMOL of obviousness.
- Read the Federal Circuit's Full Decision in W. Union Co. v. Moneygram Payment Sys., Inc., 10-1080