CAFC Patent Cases, 9/8/21–9/20/21

CAFC Patent Cases, 9/8/21–9/20/21

Client Alert

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions

  1.  In Re MAXPOWER SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. [ORDER]  (2021-146, 9/8/21) (O’Malley, Reyna, Chen)

    Reyna, J.  Denying mandamus petition and dismissing appeal.  The Court declined to review the Board’s decision to institute inter partes review because decisions to institute are not appealable under 35 U.S.C.  §314(d).  The majority rejected the patentee’s argument that “the collateral order doctrine warrants immediate review because its challenge implicates questions of whether the Board can institute proceedings that are subject to arbitration.”  O’Malley, J. concurred-in-part and dissented-in-part arguing that the majority decision casts “a shadow over all agreements to arbitrate patent validity, which, after today, apply only in district courts and not in inter partes review proceedings.”

  2. OMEGA PATENTS, LLC v. CALAMP CORP. [OPINION]  (2020-1793, 2020-1794, 9/14/21) (Dyk, Prost, Hughes)

    Prost, J.  Affirming judgment of infringement and vacating and remanding for new trial on damages.  The district court improperly excluded defendant’s damages expert from testifying.  Also, patent owner failed to establish the incremental value of the asserted patent, rendering the jury’s damages award unsustainable.  Patent owner’s damages arguments based on licenses were also improper.  “Here, we conclude that [patent owner] failed to adequately account for substantial ‘distinguishing facts’ between the proffered licenses and a hypothetical negotiation over a single-patent license to the [asserted] patent.  Most glaringly, each of the eighteen proffered licensees involves numerous patents, in contrast to a hypothetical negotiation for a single-patent license.”  Hughes, J. joined-in-part and dissented-in-part.

Authors

More From This Series

Notice

Unless you are an existing client, before communicating with WilmerHale by e-mail (or otherwise), please read the Disclaimer referenced by this link.(The Disclaimer is also accessible from the opening of this website). As noted therein, until you have received from us a written statement that we represent you in a particular manner (an "engagement letter") you should not send to us any confidential information about any such matter. After we have undertaken representation of you concerning a matter, you will be our client, and we may thereafter exchange confidential information freely.

Thank you for your interest in WilmerHale.