ARTICLE
25 September 2021

CAFC Patent Cases, 9/8/21–9/20/21

W
WilmerHale

Contributor

WilmerHale provides legal representation across a comprehensive range of practice areas critical to the success of its clients. With a staunch commitment to public service, the firm is a leader in pro bono representation. WilmerHale is 1,000 lawyers strong with 12 offices in the United States, Europe and Asia.
Reyna, J. Denying mandamus petition and dismissing appeal.
United States Intellectual Property

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions

  1.  In Re MAXPOWER SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. [ORDER]  (2021-146, 9/8/21) (O'Malley, Reyna, Chen)
    Reyna, J.  Denying mandamus petition and dismissing appeal.  The Court declined to review the Board's decision to institute inter partes review because decisions to institute are not appealable under 35 U.S.C.  §314(d).  The majority rejected the patentee's argument that "the collateral order doctrine warrants immediate review because its challenge implicates questions of whether the Board can institute proceedings that are subject to arbitration."  O'Malley, J. concurred-in-part and dissented-in-part arguing that the majority decision casts "a shadow over all agreements to arbitrate patent validity, which, after today, apply only in district courts and not in inter partes review proceedings."
  2. OMEGA PATENTS, LLC v. CALAMP CORP. [OPINION]  (2020-1793, 2020-1794, 9/14/21) (Dyk, Prost, Hughes) Prost, J.  Affirming judgment of infringement and vacating and remanding for new trial on damages.  The district court improperly excluded defendant's damages expert from testifying.  Also, patent owner failed to establish the incremental value of the asserted patent, rendering the jury's damages award unsustainable.  Patent owner's damages arguments based on licenses were also improper.  "Here, we conclude that [patent owner] failed to adequately account for substantial 'distinguishing facts' between the proffered licenses and a hypothetical negotiation over a single-patent license to the [asserted] patent.  Most glaringly, each of the eighteen proffered licensees involves numerous patents, in contrast to a hypothetical negotiation for a single-patent license."  Hughes, J. joined-in-part and dissented-in-part.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More