Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 24 NOVEMBER 2016

IPR Validity Challenge on Related Patent Prevents Preliminary Injunction

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP
Contributor
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP is one of the world’s largest firms focusing on...

View firm profile
Explore more from Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner LLP

A California court denied a preliminary injunction for patent infringement based on an IPR validity challenge filed against the asserted patent and an IPR validity challenge against a related patent...

United StatesIntellectual Property

Abstract

A California court denied a preliminary injunction for patent infringement based on an IPR validity challenge filed against the asserted patent and an IPR validity challenge against a related patent that raised serious questions about the validity of the asserted claims.

Patent owners can ask a court to order accused infringers to cease alleged infringing activities during a litigation. Courts will grant one of these motions for a "preliminary injunction" where a patentee successfully demonstrates that they are likely to win the case, and that even after winning, the patent owner will likely be unable to recapture market share, customers, or goodwill lost if the accused infringer is allowed to continue the accused activities.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from