A “Catch-22” is defined as a dilemma or difficult circumstance from which there is no escape because of mutually conflicting or dependent conditions. This is an example.
A defendant asserting a motion to transfer venue must show that the transferee district is clearly more convenient. Here, the court found that showing was not made
Nothing like a set of pretrial rulings to start your day off, especially when they include partial grants regarding damages experts.
When can you use a rebuttal expert in the claim construction process? This order gives a few clues.
This issue rarely comes up, especially in this flea-flicker-ish context, but this order provides a useful template for when it does.
Another batch of status conferences last week.
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?
Just in time to be able to skip tomorrow’s scheduling conference…