Federal Circuit Court of Appeals News

Appcelerator ICEsoft Kaazing Nexaweb Sun KEYNOTES: Virtualization News Desk By: Maureen O'Gara May. via Ajax.sys-con.com

Comment?

“High legal fees have been the chief deterrent for Chinese companies when faced with Section 337 investigations, which on many occasions have forced them to accept undesirable terms or simply withdraw from the U.S. market”

For many reasons, especially the hefty legal fees and unfamiliar system, a lawsuit in the United States is the last thing that most Chinese companies want to be involved in. via Xinhuanet

Comment?

Oracle's database software doesn't infringe a patent by smaller rival Mangosoft, a U.S. appeals court ruled, upholding a lower-court finding. via San Jose Mercury News

Comment?

This guest post was written by Charles R. Macedo, Jung Hahm, Howard Wizenfeld and Norajean McCaffrey. via Philip Brooks' Patent Infringement Up...

Comment?

Can you patent an abstract idea? That's what's being decided in a US Court of Appeals in Washington. via AlwaysOn

Comment?

“Scanner did not attempt to mislead the Patent Office in any way. We are confident the Court of Appeals will rule that our patents are enforceable and reverse the award of fees to ICOS.”

The Court of Appeals heard oral argument on May 9, 2008 for Scanner's appeal of a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. via PR-inside.com

Comment?

“A narrow focus on physicality requirements is not well suited to the electronic age”

Is a baseball pitcher's method for throwing a curveball patentable? How about a chiropractor's techniques? A federal appeals court wrestled with those kinds of questions Thursday when it considered placing ... via The Modesto Bee

Comment?

On May 7th, one day before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit hears In re Bilski, NewEconomyPatents.org will host a media - 05/06/2008 - 03:09 PM BOSTON-- --Peter Chantiles, vice president and ... via Business Wire

Comment?

As a general rule, if the government appropriates your property, it is considered a taking of private property for public use under the Fifth Amendment and the state must pay you "just compensation." This is ... via The Volokh Conspiracy

Comment?

Zusha Elinson The Recorder/Law.com April 30, 2008 Two years ago, a Virginia judge tore Rambus to pieces for allegedly shredding documents while preparing to sue rivals for patent infringement. via ConsortiumInfo.org News

Comment?