Do defendants and the court have the right to ask who is funding a particular patent litigation? Chief Judge Connolly in Delaware says they do, and in In re Nimitz, the Federal Circuit denied a request to stop the judge’s inquiry.
Continue Reading Delaware Judge Seeks to Expose Patent-Litigation Funders
In patent infringement cases, venue is proper under 28 U.S.C § 1406(a) where either (1) the company accused of infringement is incorporated or (2) where the company has committed acts of infringement and has a “regular and established place of business.” Given the increase in employees working from home in recent years, the question has arisen as to whether an employee’s home office is considered a “regular and established place of business” for the purposes of patent venue. In most instances, the courts have indicated that an employee’s home office is insufficient to establish venue absent the company ratifying that home office as a “regular and established place of business.” However, the Federal Circuit’s ruling in In re Monolith Power Systems, Inc. may have reopened that question.
Continue Reading Do Employees Working from Home Impact Venue in Patent Litigation?
Copyright protection automatically attaches to a work when it is created. Specifically, copyright protection attaches to the original, creative work when it is fixed in a tangible medium, such as when it is written, drawn, recorded digitally, or typed electronically. Copyright law “protects original works of authorship including literary, dramatic, musical, and artistic works, such as poetry, novels, movies, songs, computer software, and architecture.” It also protects images, photos, videos, and other written work, such as blog posts. See here.
Continue Reading Tips for Avoiding Copyright Infringement
Previously, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“Federal Circuit”) has found that a non-human may infringe patents. Arguably, an AI system, which is a non-human, can also create or invent. But can an AI system be a named inventor on a patent? The Federal Circuit recently addressed this issue in Thaler v. Vidal.
Continue Reading AI Systems May Invent, But Are They Inventors?
Most patent claims describe an invention using positive claim limitations that expressly recite the required elements or features of an invention. Sometimes, however, it is necessary, or desirable, to use a negative claim limitation to expressly specify an invention requires the absence of an element or feature. But when is it allowable to claim the negative?
Continue Reading When Can a Patent Claim Positively Include the Negative?
