The Federal Circuit appears oblivious to Blawgletter’s law practice. Why else would it issue four patent decisions in one day? A more considerate court would have spaced them out so that we’d have time to digest them for sharing with our dear readers.
So, instead of cutting the cases into tasty morsels, we offer these savory chunks:
- Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. v. Apotex, Inc. , No 06-1564 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2007) — Patent on a method for treating bacterial ear infections fails the pre-KSR test for obviousness.
- ACCO Brands, Inc. v. ABA Locks Manufacturer Co., Ltd., No. 06-1570 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2007) — Evidence of direct infringement of a patent on "Computer Physical Security Device" failed to support the jury’s verdict of infringement by inducement.
- Arminak & Assocs., Inc. v. Saint-Gobain Calmar, Inc., No. 06-1561 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2007) — District court properly granted summary judgment of noninfringement on two "design" patents relating to "trigger sprayer shrouds".
- L.B. Plastics, Inc. v. Amerimax Home Products, Inc., No. 06-1465 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2007) — The court affirmed noninfringement summary judgment as to patents on "gutter guards" under both a literal infringement analysis and the doctrine of equivalents.
Barry Barnett
