Remove 2014 Remove Contracts Remove Licensing Remove Patent Infringement
article thumbnail

CAFC Distinguishes Forum Selection Clause Language from Precedential Cases in Win for Abbott

IP Watchdog

holding that the language of the governing contract's forum selection clause expressly allowed for the filing of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings in certain circumstances. entered into a settlement and license agreement in 2014, following years of patent litigation over their competing glucose monitoring system patents.

article thumbnail

Post-Default Creditor’s Right to Assign, License and Enforce Patent does not Disturb Patentee’s Separate Right to Sue Infringers

Patently-O

May 1, 2024) offers some interesting insight into leveraged patent transactions, and the effect of a lender’s ability to license or assign a patent on the patent owner’s standing to sue for infringement, especially after default. ” IT sued Zebra for infringement in the W.D.Tex.,

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Guest Post by Prof. Contreras: HTC v. Ericsson – Ladies and Gentlemen, The Fifth Circuit Doesn’t Know What FRAND Means Either

Patently-O

The decision is significant as it is the first by the Fifth Circuit to address the licensing of standards-essential patents and the meaning of “fair, reasonable and nondiscriminatory” (FRAND) licensing terms, adding to the growing body of jurisprudence already issued by the Third, Ninth and Federal Circuits in this area.

article thumbnail

Fifth Circuit Affirms That Ericsson’s Offers to HTC Complied With ETSI FRAND Commitment (HTC v. Ericsson)

LexBlog IP

The decision rejected HTC’s argument that the non-discrimination portion of the FRAND commitment required Ericsson to give HTC the same licensing terms as given larger mobile device manufacturers, because that would convert the ETSI FRAND commitment into a most-favored-licensee approach that ETSI had refused to adopt. per 4G device.

article thumbnail

IP and Cannabis: The Current Landscape

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

The USPTO is willing to issue patents on cannabis irrespective of its legality because patent rights are merely negative rights; a patent is the right to exclude others from the invention claimed therein rather than a license to make, use, or sell the invention. 208 (2014). Pure Hemp Collective, Inc. ,

IP 52
article thumbnail

Keeping up with Belgian patent litigation: Year case law review 2021

The IPKat

Admittedly, Belgian law provides that a Belgian patent ceases to have effect once a European patent covering the same invention has been granted to the same inventor, but this provision does not govern the relationship between two European patents.

article thumbnail

Inguran, LLC, DBA STGenetics V. ABS Gloabl, INC., Genius PLC, No. 2022-1385 (July 5, 2023)

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Background In 2006 and 2012, ABS and STGenetics entered into related contracts for sorting semen. In 2014, ABS filed an antitrust lawsuit in the Western District of Wisconsin against STGenetics. STGenetics brought counterclaims and third-party claims for, among other things, infringement of the ’987 patent.