Arthrex Redux

Arthrex, Inc. v. Smith & Nephew, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-2140 (Fed. Cir., March 23, 2020).

Photo of John P. Isacson
John P. Isacson

In a 62-page order and accompanying opinions, the Federal Circuit denied an en banc rehearing of the Arthrex decision from October 2019. The Arthrex decision concerned the constitutionality of the PTAB, and is discussed in detail in our November 1, 2019 post. Continue reading “Arthrex Redux”

A Bite in the Apple

Photo of John P. Isacson
John P. Isacson

Apple Inc. v. California Institute of Technology, Appeal Nos. 2019-1580, -1581 (Fed. Cir., March 5, 2020).

In January of this year, a jury awarded the California Institute of Technology (Caltech) $837,801,178 for Apple’s infringement of three patents. One of those patents was U.S. Patent No. 7,116,710. The ‘710 patent claimed methods of encoding a signal by partitioning data blocks into sub-blocks, encoding, and interleaving.

The ‘710 patent was the subject of IPR2017-00210 and IPR2017-00219 filed by Caltech. In both IPRs, the ‘710 patent was not held to be unpatentable. Apple appealed. The case was argued on March 4, 2020, and the next day the Federal Circuit issued a summary affirmance pursuant to Rule 36. Accordingly, the IPRs will provide no reason to set aside the jury award.

IPR Estoppel Strikes Again

Photo of John P. Isacson
John P. Isacson

Wasica Finance GmbH et al. v. Schrader Int’l, Inc. et al., C.A. 13-1353-LPS (D. Del. January 14, 2020) (publicly available on January 21, 2020).

Plaintiffs Wasica and Bluearc (collectively “Wasica”) filed an infringement action based on U.S. Patent No. 5,602,524 against defendants (collectively “Schrader”). The patent pertained to devices for measuring the air pressure in tires. Continue reading “IPR Estoppel Strikes Again”