Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The speedy resolution of cases was in part due to procedures set up by Judge T. John Ward, appointed to the court in 1999, that kept patent infringement cases to a strict time table. [6] In 2017, the Eastern District of Texas saw the most patent infringement cases of any district court, with one judge overseeing 25% of all such cases in the nation.
In 2006, the number of cases grew to an estimated 236. [5] The district has been perceived to be a favorable jurisdiction for plaintiffs in patent infringement lawsuits, which win 88% of the time compared to a nationwide average of 68% in 2006, [6] even, according to some claims, in dubious cases (i.e. patent trolls). [7]
There were 14 patent cases in 1999, [12] 32 in 2002, [3] 155 in 2005, [12] and 234 in 2006. [3] And, in 2013, 1,495 patent cases were filed. [13] The Eastern District of Texas is one of eight with more than 100 new patent filings each year. [12] Ward heard more than 160 patent cases in his first seven years on the bench. [8]
Lodsys, LLC was an American patent holding company located in Marshall, Texas that brought patent infringement lawsuits against a variety of companies in the US. [2] Numerous app development enterprises have accused them of " patent trolling ".
Multiple lawsuits over several patents relating to MP3 encoding and compression technologies. Ariad v. Lilly - 2006. Broad infringement case related to a ubiquitous transcription factor. EBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. - Supreme Court, 2006. Ruled that an injunction should not automatically issue based on a finding of patent infringement.
35 U.S.C. § 271(b) creates a type of indirect infringement described as "active inducement of infringement," while 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) creates liability for those who have contributed to the infringement of a patent. Both types of indirect infringement can only occur when there has actually been a direct infringement of the patent. [5]
One year later, Taco Cabana sued Two Pesos in federal district court for trade dress infringement under the Lanham Act and for theft of trade secrets under Texas common law. [10] Both the district court and the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit agreed that Two Pesos deliberately infringed upon Taco Cabana's trade dress, and ...
Patent issues raised in counterclaim do not give rise to Federal Circuit jurisdiction Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd. 545 U.S. 193: 2005: Related to Research exemption. EBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. 547 U.S. 388: 2006: Ruled that an injunction should not automatically issue based on a finding of patent infringement.