The District of Minnesota continues to see many cases transferred to other districts after last year’s Supreme Court decision on venue in patent cases in TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods.
The District of Minnesota recently issued its fourth post-Alice decision, this time addressing the question of patent subject matter eligibility for a check processing patent.
Over a year after the Supreme Court’s decision in Halo Electronics, district courts continue to disagree over what is required to adequately plead a claim for willful infringement. The District of Minnesota is beginning to enter the fray.
In May 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods and limited venue in patent cases to where a corporate defendant is incorporated or has a regular and established place of business.
The Honorable Donovan Frank issued the second decision in the District of Minnesota to address the question of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in the context of a motion to dismiss.
Patent Trial and Appeal Board Creates Loophole to Challenge Written Description and Enablement in Older Patent Families
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision creates a loophole that enables challengers to bring new kinds of attacks against older applications.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s May 22, 2017, decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group redefined the possible venues for patent infringement lawsuits.
In Helsinn Healthcare, S.A., v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the degree to which the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA) altered the “on sale” prior art provision of 35 U.S.C. § 102.
In SCA Hygiene Products v. First Quality Baby Products, the Supreme Court recently ended over a 100 years of application of the equitable doctrine of laches in patent infringement cases.