When are dependent claims of patent infringement estopped as a result of a judgment on their independents in a prior case?
A Marshall jury found that Wells Fargo Bank infringed on two of USAA’s patents relating to technology that allows users to deposit checks using mobile devices and awarded USAA $200 million.
Last week a Marshall jury found by clear and convincing evidence that, from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art, the asserted claims only involved activities that were well-understood, routine, and
conventional as of the relevant date. But why were they asked this?
Summary judgment is a good tool for dispensing with discrete claims or defenses, in this case 19 of them, plus change. No word on whether Katherine Heigl will be playing the lawyer (but that would be cool).
At issue here was whether the defendant had been properly served, but more importantly, were they a proper defendant under 35 U.S.C. § 299?
Senior didn’t use forms. And you shouldn’t either (including this one).
In Waco for a hearing this morning, but it’s a Marshall case that’s caught my attention. Did you know there’s a trolley here now?
Just got out of the Marshall patent scheduling conferences originally scheduled for last month, so here’s the relevant information re: cases heard and time to Markman and trial.
Just in time to be able to skip tomorrow’s scheduling conference…