Lack of Meaningful Competition Between the Parties Weighed Against Conclusion of Irreparable Harm, Leading to Denial of Permanent Injunction

Nichia Corp. v. Everlight Americas, INC., No. 2016-1585, 2016-1618 (Fed. Cir. April 28, 2017) (precedential).  On appeal from E.D. Tex.  Before Reyna, Hughes and Stoll. Takeaway: Lack of meaningful competition between the parties weighs against conclusion of irreparable harm. Procedural Posture: Nichia, the owner of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,530,250, 7,432,589, …

Permanent Injunction is not Overly Broad Where the Plaintiff Would Not Enforce the Injunction Against Noninfringing Uses

UNITED CONSTRUCTION PRODUCTS  v. TILE TECH: Dec 15, 2016. Before Moore, Wallach, and Stoll.                                                             Takeaway: The plain language of the …

Induced Infringement Requires the Inducer to Successfully Communicate With and Induce a Third-Party Direct Infringer

POWER INTEGRATIONS v. FAIRCHILD SEMICONDUCTOR: Dec. 12, 2016. Before Prose, Schall, Chen.                                                              Takeaway: A party cannot be liable for induced infringement where it does not successfully communicate with and induce a third-party direct infringer. Where a finding of infringement by equivalence would entirely vitiate a particular claimed element, such …

Irreparable Harm For Permanent Injunction Does Not Require Proof That Infringing Features Were The Sole Cause Of Lost Sales

Authored by Paul Qualey, Dervis Magistre, and Vivian Cheng Digest of Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2014-1802 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 17, 2015) (precedential). On appeal from N.D. Cal. Before Prost, Moore, and Reyna. Procedural Posture: Plaintiff Apple appealed district court’s order denying plaintiff’s motion for a permanent …

Federal Circuit Vacates Injunction and Civil Contempt Award after Claim Was Found Invalid

  Digest of EPlus, Inc. v. Lawson Software, Inc., No. 2013-1506, 2013-1587 (Fed. Cir. July 25, 2014) (precedential). On appeal from E.D. Va. Before Prost, Dyk, and O’Malley. Procedural Posture: The district court found that five claims were valid, a jury found that all five claims were infringed, and the district …