October 2011 Archives

Here at FindLaw, we understand the pressures of being a legal professional - most of us are recovering lawyers - so we want to help by tossing you that preferred life preserver of the legal profession, the short list.

Today's offering: Top five things to know about Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Alan Lourie.

Judge Lourie recently told a crowd at the George Washington University Law School that he doesn't sweat Supreme Court review of the Federal Circuit's decisions because it "clearly perceives patent law not as an obscure backwater but an important part of the economy," reports BNA.

We live for the early days of fall, when the air is crisp and leaves are turning. Fall, however, is not for everyone.

If you’re a patent lawyer who prefers warmth and sunshine, and you need CLE credit, we have great news. The International Performance Management Institute is hosting its Intellectual Property (IP) Law & Management Institute at the Rancho Las Palmas Resort and Spa in Palm Springs, Caifornia, November 6-8.

In case a working trip to Palm Springs is not enough to lure you away from your office, we have details on the conference topics, too.

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that Streck Inc. beat Research & Diagnostic Systems, Inc. (R&D) to the punch in developing hematology control products, and upheld Streck’s patents on the products.

Hematology instruments, such as those used to analyze samples of blood, measure the different types of blood cells in the sample. Government regulations and best practices require that these instruments be regularly checked for accuracy. Instrument accuracy is checked through the use of “controls” of known blood composition, which verify whether an instrument is accurately reading the blood sample.

The appellate process is expensive, but appeals paid off this week for generic drug manufacturer Apotex Corporation in its ongoing dispute with French pharmaceutical maker Sanofi-Aventis (Sanofi).

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that a New York federal judge erred in ordering Apotex to pay over $107 million in prejudgment interest, in addition to $442.2 million in actual damages, to Sanofi, reports The Wall Street Journal.

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this week that the International Trade Commission (ITC) can halt imports that incorporate misappropriated trade secrets, even when the misappropriation occurs entirely in a foreign country.

Amsted Industries Inc. is a domestic manufacturer of cast steel railway wheels that owns two secret processes for manufacturing wheels. Amsted’s “ABC process” is the subject of this claim. Amsted previously practiced the ABC process at its foundry in Calera, Alabama, but it no longer uses that process in the United States. Amsted has licensed the ABC process to several firms with foundries in China.

If you’re a patent lawyer looking for the ideal combination of continuing legal education credit (CLE) and Texas charm, you’re in luck. The University of Texas School of Law (UT Law) is hosting its 16th Annual Advanced Patent Law Institute October 27-28 in Austin, Texas.

Standard registration for the conference, which will be held at the Four Seasons Hotel, is $645. The registration rate increases to $695 after October 19. Registration can be completed online on UT Law’s CLE website.

Rambus, a global technology licensing corporation, appeared before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals this week in a patent infringement case involving graphics chip maker Nvidia.

The two companies were in the court for oral arguments on Thursday in a dispute about whether Nvidia "infringed Rambus patents for controlling and managing the flow of computer data to and from a chip's memory," reports Reuters. The International Trade Commission (ITC) previously found that Nvidia infringed Rambus chip patents, and issued an order barring the importation of any chip made with the infringing technology.

Some courts believe that declaratory actions cannot occur absent a case or controversy. Luckily, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals is always ready to clear up a controversy over a controversy.

Last week, the Federal Circuit reinstated a case previously dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, finding that the facts presented a case or controversy, even in the relatively amicable relationship between the parties.