4,414 results found

Trade secret owners can choose to pursue actions for misappropriation under state law in state court, under federal law in federal court, or under both state and federal law in federal court.

In Omega Patents, LLC v. CalAmp Corp, No. 20-1793 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 16, 2021), the Federal Circuit reviewed several appealed issues including an award of damages.

In Commscope Techs. LLC v. Dali Wireless Inc., Nos. 2020-1817, 2020-1818 (Fed. Cir. August 24, 2021), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's denial of JMOL...

The smart textile industry continues to respond to customer interest in interactive fabrics that meet a variety of needs...

The common adage is that design patents are easier, quicker and less expensive to obtain than utility patents.

As robotics and artificial intelligence (AI) technologies continue to grow, businesses in this field face the challenge of how they should name their new technologies.

In Apple Inc. v. Squires, No. 24-1864 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 13, 2026), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Northern District of California's ruling that the USPTO Director's NHK-Fintiv framework...

In Eli Lilly & Company v. Hospira, Inc., Nos. 2018-2128, 2018-2127 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2019), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's

In Knowles Elecs. LLC v. Iancu, No. 2016-1954, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB decision in an inter partes reexamination, which affirmed the examiner's findings that the claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,018,049...

In GoPro, Inc. v. Contour IP Holding LLC, No. 17-1894, 17-1936 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2018), the Federal Circuit vacated the Board's determination that a product catalog ...

Several recent Board Notices indicate that the PTAB will not tolerate clever attempts to get around the page limits for inter partes review (IPR) and covered business method review (CBM) petitions (60 and 80 pages, respectively)

The world's most famous trade secret is probably the formula for Coca Cola.

In Universal Secure Registry LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 2020-2044 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 26, 2021), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's determination that four patents related to securing credit card transactions...

Patents for financial technologies are in the crosshairs. They were targeted in Bilski and have been besieged since Alice.

In Finesse Wireless LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC, No. 2024-1039 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 24, 2025), the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's denial of AT&T's motion...

In Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board ("PTAB") may consider patent eligibility of substitute claims presented in an inter partes

Ericsson appealed an IPR decision by the PTAB finding claims 1-16 of U.S. Patent No. 6,952,408 ("the '408 patent") to be not anticipated and nonobviousness.

Advanced Micro Devices Inc. (AMD) was originally assigned the asserted patents. AMD executed an agreement that purported to transfer "all right, title and interest" in the patents to Lone Star.