IP Update, Vol. 15, No. 12, December 2012
McDermott Will & Emery
December 28, 2012
In this Issue:
Patents
- Federal Circuit Rules It’s Own Standards Apply When Considering Preliminary Injunctions
- Preliminary Testing of Medical Devices in Animals Enables Their Use in Humans
- Rare Finding of Non-Obviousness Based Solely on Secondary Considerations
- Section 256 Inventorship Claim Does Not Accrue Until the Patent Issues
- Infringement of Method Claims Requires Proof of Actual Performance Rather than Mere Capability
- Section 102(g) Is Still Available as a Defense for Pre-AIA Patents
- Six-Year-Long ITC Investigation Concludes with Finding of Obviousness
- Patent Infringement Claims Not Precluded by Related Trademark Infringement Claims in Prior Suit
- Reissue Is Not Remedy to Terminal Disclaimer
- **WEB ONLY** Diagnostic Claims For Assessing the Risk of Down’s Syndrome Are Not Patent Eligible
- Wrong Claim Construction Leads to Erroneous Infringement and Validity Findings
- Federal Circuit Mows Down Lower Court’s “Into Engagement with” Claim Construction
Trademarks
- 40-Year Delay Smacks Down Monetary Damages, but Not Permanent Injunction, in Fraternity and Sorority Trademark Suit Against Paddle Manufacturer
Copyrights
- Lack of Striking Similarity Ends The Big C Copyright Infringement Action in the Ninth Circuit
- D.C. Circuit Holds Restitution Must Be Based on Loss of Victim, Not Defendant’s Gain
Trade Secrets
- Pleading Unjust Enrichment Does Not Support a Claim for the Underlying Trade Secret Misappropriation
Antitrust
- Joint DOJ-FTC Workshop Explores Competitive Impact of Patent Assertion Entities
- FTC Signals Stricter Stance on Injunctions for FRAND-Encumbered Patents
- Walker Process Standing Affirmed for Direct Purchaser Antitrust Plaintiffs
Cert Alert
- U.S. Supreme Court to Rule on “Pay-for-Delay” Antitrust Issue

![Fish & Richardson: Avoiding Waiver with Thorough Explanation of Anticipated Motion [ChiMei Innolux Corp. v. Semiconductor Energy Lab. Co]](/modules/mod_raxo_allmode/tools/tb.php?src=/images/stories/fishrichardsonlogo.gif&w=120&h=72&zc=1)






















![Venable: The Federal Circuit Draws the Line on Permissible Changes to Design Patent Claims – Or Does It? [In re Owens]](/modules/mod_raxo_allmode/tools/tb.php?src=/images/stories/VenableLogo.gif&w=120&h=72&zc=1)
![Arent Fox: Landmark Decision Regarding Fair, Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory ("FRAND") Royalty Rates for Patents Essential to Industry Standards [Microsoft Corp. v. Motorola Mobility]](/modules/mod_raxo_allmode/tools/tb.php?src=/images/stories/ArentFox.gif&w=120&h=72&zc=1)




