Causal Nexus Requirement for Showing Irreparable Harm in Multi-consumer, Multi-Feature Products Only Requires An infringing Feature to be “A Driver” of Demand

GENBAND v. METASWITCH: July 10, 2017. Before Lourie, Taranto, and Chen.   Takeaway: In multi-consumer, multi-feature products, the causal nexus requirement for showing irreparable harm can be satisfied by evidence showing that an infringing feature increases a product’s desirability, or evidence showing that the absence of the feature would make …

Federal Circuit Upholds Injunction and Comments Upon the Appropriate Test for Infringement Under the Doctrine of Equivalents in Chemical Cases

MYLAN INSTITUTIONAL LLC v. AUROBINDO PHARMA LTD:  May 19, 2017. Before Lourie, Moore and Reyna.   Takeaway: CAFC ruled the district court did not err in granting preliminary injunction because the district court correctly determined defendant was unlikely to prove invalidity of one patent-in-suit, even though the district court did err …

Claims Directed to Encoding and Decoding Image Data Held Patent-Ineligible

RecogniCorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co., Ltd., No. 2016-1499 (Fed. Cir. April 28, 2017) (precedential).  On appeal from W. D. Wash. Before Lourie, Reyna, and Stoll. Takeaway: Adding one abstract idea (mathematical equation) to another abstract idea (encoding and decoding) does not render the claim non-abstract. A claim directed to an abstract …

Web Page Authentication Patent is Outside the Scope of CBM Review

SECURE AXCESS v. PNC BANK: Feb. 21, 2017. Before Lourie (dissenting), Plager, and Taranto. Takeaway: To qualify for CBM review, a patent must claim “the practice, administration, or management of a financial product or service.” Claims that are only “incidental to a financial activity” do not qualify. Procedural Posture: Secure …

The Term “Visually Negligible” Found Not Indefinite Where the Written Description Provided a Skilled Artisan With an Understanding, with Reasonable Certainty, of What it Means

SONIX TECH. CO. v. PUBLICATIONS INT’L, LTD.: Jan. 5, 2017. Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Taranto. Takeaway: Claims involving terms of degree are not inherently indefinite, and have been found definite where they provide enough certainty to one of skill in the art when read in the context of the invention. …