Virginia IP Law > Troutman Sanders LLP

EDVA Court Upholds Laches Defense and Federal Circuit Reaffirms Laches Defense in Patent Cases

In a detailed and comprehensive opinion, District Judge Mark Davis of the EDVA recently granted summary judgment of laches on a claim for correction of inventorship under 35 U.S.C. § 256. Lismont v. Alexander Binzel Corp., Case No. 2:12CV592, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 116203 (E.D.Va. Aug. 20, 2014) (found here). The Supreme Court’s recent decision in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, 134 S.Ct. 1962 (2014), however, raises serious questions about whether laches is still a viable defense to patent infringement claims, though the Federal Circuit recently ruled that its prior laches decisions remain controlling precedent, even after Petrella. [Read more →]

September 22, 2014   Comments Off

EDVA Grants Summary Judgment to Defendants in AWCPA Infringement Case, Finding Two High-Rise Residential Buildings Not Extrinsically Similar

In this architectural work copyright infringement action, Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. claimed defendants’ design and construction of a high-rise apartment building in McLean, Virginia, “Two Park Crest” (currently under construction), infringed upon Humphreys’ high-rise condominium building in Minneapolis, Minnesota, “Grant Park.” The court granted summary judgment for the defendants, ultimately concluding that no reasonable jury could find the Two Park Crest and the Grant Park designs extrinsically similar. Humphreys & Partners Architects, L.P. v. Lessard Design, Inc. et al., No. 1:13-cv-433, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124305 (E.D. Va. Sept. 2, 2014).  [Read more →]

September 15, 2014   Comments Off

Troutman Sanders Federal Circuit Review – August 25, 2014

FederalCircuitReviewheader

Each week, Troutman Sanders’ Federal Circuit review summarizes the Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions from the prior week.   

This week:

  • Federal Circuit Affirms No Legally Sufficient Evidence Could Support A Finding Of Infringement

[Read more →]

August 25, 2014   Comments Off

Federal Circuit Tosses $30 Million EDVA Judgment Against Google, Holding Patent Claims Invalid as Obvious

In a recent nonprecedential decision, a divided panel of the Federal Circuit reversed a jury’s $30 million damages award based on its finding after a 12-day trial that Google and other defendants infringed two patents. I/P Engine, Inc. v. AOL Inc., 2014 U.S. App. LEXIS 15667 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 15, 2014) (per curiam). I/P Engine contained an interesting lineup of opinions: the majority concluded by a per curiam opinion that the asserted patents were invalid as obvious; Judge Mayer, concurring in the result, opined that the patents were also unpatentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101; and Judge Chen, dissenting, disagreed with the majority’s conclusion that the patents were invalid as obvious. [Read more →]

August 25, 2014   Comments Off

26th Annual Virginia State Bar IP Seminar Sept. 19-20

Registration is now open for the 26th Annual VSB Intellectual Property Law CLE Weekend Seminar on September 19-20 at the Embassy Suites Hotel in Alexandria.  The seminar anticipates approval for eight hours of CLE, including two hours of ethics CLE.

The program includes presentations on Best Practices in Trademark Prosecution, Ethics in Trial Practice in the PTO, IP issues in 3-D Printing and Manufacturing, and a panel discusssion on appeals featuring judges from the Fourth Circuit, Federal Circuit and the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia.  Tony Dutra, Legal Editor for BNA’s Patent, Trademark and Copyright Journal, will speak at the CLE’s closing luncheon on Saturday.

Details about registration, and the full list of panels and speakers is available on the VSB’s website here.

August 18, 2014   Comments Off

Troutman Sanders Federal Circuit Review – August 15, 2014

FederalCircuitReviewheader

Each week, Troutman Sanders’ Federal Circuit review summarizes the Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions from the prior week.   

This week:

  • Claims Not Invalid for Lack of Written Description Where Specification Described Invention as “Broadly” Including a Component The the Claims Did Not Recite

[Read more →]

August 18, 2014   Comments Off

Corporate Affiliates Dismissed for Lack of Standing to Enforce Patents

Three related corporations, Hill-Rom Company (HRC), Hill-Rom Services, Inc. (HRS) and Hill-Rom Manufacturing, Inc. (HRM), brought suit against General Electric for patent infringement. HRM is the sole manufacturer of products embodying the patented inventions, and HRC sells and distributes those products, but HRS is the owner of the patents in suit. Even though Hill-Rom claimed that HRM and HRC were exclusive licensees with the right to enforce the patents, the Court held that they lacked standing and dismissed them from the suit. Hill-Rom Co., Inc. v. General Electric Co., Case No. 2:14CV187, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108428 (E.D.Va. Aug. 6, 2014), found here.

[Read more →]

August 7, 2014   Comments Off

Troutman Sanders Federal Circuit Review – July 29, 2014

FederalCircuitReviewheader

Each week, Troutman Sanders’ Federal Circuit review summarizes the Federal Circuit precedential patent opinions from the prior week.   

This week:

  • Defendant Forfeited Post-Verdict Motion for Judgement Because it Did Not Specifically Move for Same Before Submitting to the Jury
  • Appeal of Contempt Order with Injunction Dismissed for Lack of Jurisdiction 

[Read more →]

July 30, 2014   Comments Off

Pool Toy Patent Invalidated on Summary Judgment

Because invalidity must be proven with clear and convincing evidence, summary judgment of invalidity is rare. This is especially the case with claims of anticipation or obviousness, where a “battle of the experts” can easily create an issue of fact. In a recent case, though, Judge Davis of the Norfolk Division of the EDVA found, as a matter of law, that a patent on a self-propelled pool toy was either anticipated or rendered obvious by the prior art. Swimways Corp. v. Zuru, Inc., No. 2:13CV334, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98092 (E.D. Va. July 18, 2014), found here. [Read more →]

July 25, 2014   Comments Off

EDVA Rejects Argument That a Common Law Trade Dress Infringement Claim Is Subsumed by a Trademark Infringement Claim

Judge Liam O’Grady upheld a unanimous jury verdict in favor of Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for Eastern District of Virginia. The jury found that Handi-Foil Corporation willfully infringed on Reynolds’ trade dress rights. See Reynolds Consumer Products, Inc. v. Handi-Foil Corporation, No. 1:13-cv-214, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98059 (E.D. Va. July 18, 2014).

Both parties manufacture aluminum roll foil. Reynolds Wrap has been the leading brand for decades. Reynolds sued Handi-Foil in 2012 when it launched its version of the product claiming that the company’s packaging violated its trade dress. The jury found in favor of Reynolds on that count. By post-trial motion, Handi-Foil requested that the court set aside the verdict. Handi-Foil filed a renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and, in the alternative, moved for a new trial. In its argument for a new trial, Handi-Foil posited that the jury’s decision was inconsistent. [Read more →]

July 24, 2014   Comments Off