New England IP Blog

Covering intellectual property developments in New England, and other developments that impact New England companies.

Category Archives: Software

Subscribe to Software RSS Feed

Computer-Based Publishing Patent Goes Offline after Alice Inquiry

Security1In a recent order from the District of Massachusetts, the court granted a defendant’s motion for summary judgment in a patent infringement dispute, finding the asserted patent claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court’s underlying analysis is particularly instructive for its application of the Alice two-part framework to claims that are directed to computerized systems … Continue Reading

Pre-Sale Use of Data Storage Trademark Not Enough to Secure Priority Rights

database-4A Massachusetts federal court recently found multiple early uses of a sought-after trademark insufficient to confer priority of rights.  The dispute concerned two technology companies, Nexsan and EMC, each seeking to use the UNITY mark in connection with their computer data storage technologies. The Court held that EMC’s pre-sale uses did not establish “use in commerce” and … Continue Reading

Amended Contentions Deemed Timely Served Due to Parties’ Misunderstanding

alarm lock-1Under some circumstances, party error can excuse late-filed amendments to infringement and invalidity contentions, according to a recent decision by Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV. Approximately five years ago, plaintiff DataTern, Inc. (“DataTern”) filed a patent infringement suit against defendant MicroStrategy, Inc. (“MicroStrategy”) over a patent claiming a “method for interfacing an object oriented software application … Continue Reading

Mobile Payment Patent Remains Legal Tender after Alice Challenge

barcode scanner-3In the post-Alice world, patents that relate in any material way to financial processes or systems have come under increased attacks in the early stages of infringement litigation—as defendants aim to secure a cheap and fast exit from the controversy. While such challenges are often successful, such an outcome is not guaranteed. In one recent case, a … Continue Reading

Rampage’s Patent Suit Inks a Partial Victory in Surviving Motion to Dismiss

printer-1Judge Allison Burroughs of the District of Massachusetts recently issued a decision that provides much-needed insight into pleading standards in patent cases. With the demise of Form 18 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, litigants have been faced with a number of questions concerning the level of detail a plaintiff needs to include in a … Continue Reading

Hyper-Divergence: Halo and the Preliminary Injunction Requirement for Enhanced Damages

A recent report and recommendation issued in the District of Massachusetts is one of the first cases to interpret – and arguably, to extend – the Supreme Court’s recent decision on willful infringement, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. In Simplivity Corporation v. Springpath, Inc., plaintiff Simplivity alleged infringement of U.S. Patent No. 8,478,799, … Continue Reading

Forecast Unfavorable for Inventory Software Patent

Ever since the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank shifted the contours of patent-eligible subject matter, district courts have wielded the two-part test set forth in that decision to dispatch scores of business method patents as being directed to unpatentable abstract ideas.  In a recent example, the Massachusetts district court invalidated a patent … Continue Reading

Bottom of the Ninth Disclosure of New Damages Theory Warrants More Discovery

In a recent opinion in a patent infringement case concerning a baseball pitching simulator, Judge Vanessa Bryant in the District of Connecticut issued an order to administratively close the case, pending further damages discovery. The discovery was needed because the plaintiff ProBatter apparently disclosed a new damages theory late in the case, just months before trial. … Continue Reading

Relating a Software Copyright Infringement Claim Back to its Source

In a recent order, Judge Douglas P. Woodlock of the District of Massachusetts untangled a complicated timeline to decide motions for summary judgment regarding several copyright infringement and related claims on a statute of limitations basis. The analysis is instructive to prospective plaintiffs as to when a complaint should be filed, which potential defendants it … Continue Reading

Job Applicant Software Patents Not Terminated for Invalidity

Although the subject matter eligibility of software patents has come under increased scrutiny since the Supreme Court issued its opinion last year in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, one Massachusetts court recently declined to invalidate a trio of patents directed to job applicant software. Plaintiff Kenexa had asserted infringement claims against three defendants, and two … Continue Reading

LevelUp’s Pursuit of Attorney’s Fees Goes Up to the Federal Circuit Level

In an interesting case before Judge Timothy S. Hillman in the District of Massachusetts, a dispute over whether attorney’s fees should be granted is moving up to the Federal Circuit. The case brings back before the Federal Circuit the question of the proper standard for granting attorney’s fees – a standard that has been in … Continue Reading

Locating Time Frames for the Hypothetical Negotiation

In determining a reasonable royalty for patent infringement damages, district courts often use the hypothetical negotiation analysis: that is, what is the royalty rate that the patent owner and the infringer would have agreed to in a hypothetical negotiation at the time the infringement began (assuming the patent owner was hypothetically willing to license the patent). … Continue Reading

Google Remains on the Hook After Summary Judgment Denied

Judge Rya W. Zobel’s recent decision denying a set of Google’s summary judgment motions has cleared the way for trial. Skyhook initially sued Google for infringement of thirteen patents. Currently, eight patents remain at issue: U.S. Patent Nos. 7,433,694 (the “’694 patent”); 7,474,897 (the “’897 patent”); 7,856,234 (the “’234 patent”); 8,031,657 (the “’657 patent”); 8,054,219 … Continue Reading

Protegrity’s “Bare Bones” Allegations Result in Dismissal, Again

In yet another case in the District of Connecticut, Protegrity has seen its claims for indirect and willful infringement dismissed because, according to the court, its complaint did not plead sufficient facts. District Judge Robert Chatigny granted AJB Software’s motion to dismiss, agreeing with AJB that the “bare bones” allegations in Protegrity’s complaint were insufficient … Continue Reading

Protegrity Loses Bid to Centralize in Connecticut

The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation ordered nearly twenty patent cases pending across six districts (including Connecticut, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, and the Northern and Southern districts of California) and involving fifteen different companies to proceed collectively in the Northern District of California.  The decision may be a drawback for plaintiff Protegrity Corporation which originally moved … Continue Reading

Blueprint Generation Software Not Eligible for Patenting

Speeding up a blueprint generation process that can be done by hand does not make computer software eligible for patenting. So reasoned the New Hampshire district court in another of a bevy of post-Alice district court decisions that have found certain software patents invalid under § 101 of the Patent Act. The case involved EastCoast’s … Continue Reading

EveryScape’s Patents Hit Their Vanishing Point

Last week, a federal jury in Massachusetts delivered a verdict in favor of patent-defendant Adobe Systems, invalidating all asserted claims of EveryScape’s two asserted patents.  Earlier in the litigation, the court found at summary judgment that a tool in the Vanishing Point filter of Adobe’s popular Photoshop software directly infringed EveryScape’s patents.  So at trial, Adobe … Continue Reading

Pre-Litigation Correspondence Does Not Secure Personal Jurisdiction

Plaintiffs considering bringing suit in the District of Connecticut take heed: “Plaintiffs cannot vest a Connecticut court with personal jurisdiction over a person simply by hurling an accusation of patent infringement across the country at that person and then receiving responses in Connecticut,” according to a recent order from Judge Shea.  To provide some background, … Continue Reading

No Need to Wait to Stay: Epicor Obtains Litigation Stay After Requesting Covered Business Method Review

There is no need to wait for the Patent Office to institute a review.  According to a recent order from Magistrate Judge Margolis in the District of Connecticut, the district court may stay a patent litigation as long as the defendant has filed a petition at the Patent Office requesting a patent validity review under the … Continue Reading

The Blurred Lines of the Indefiniteness Road Map

As lower courts begin to apply the Supreme Court’s reworded standard for indefiniteness as set forth in Nautilus, Inc. v. BioSig Instruments, Inc., they have grappled with the question of where to draw the line between claims that are not indefinite and those that are.  In a recent order by Judge Landya McCafferty, the New Hampshire … Continue Reading

Serial Adversaries Are No Big Deal

Massachusetts District Court Judge Indira Talwani reminded litigants that for lawyers to be conflicted out of a case, they must be on the other side of the “v” from a former client, not a former adversary, since the issue is ultimately whether counsel will be constrained from vigorous representation of their new client.  The order concerned a case … Continue Reading

Veracode Wins Patent Infringement Trial Against Appthority

Following a nine day trial, last Friday a Boston jury delivered a patent infringement verdict in favor of Veracode, Inc. and Rovi Solutions Corporation.  In the case before Judge Woodlock in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts, Veracode and Rovi accused Appthority, Inc. of infringing two patents.  The two asserted patents, U.S. … Continue Reading
LexBlog