Top 10 most recent Patent Cases on Lexis.com for the week of September 13th, 2009
1. AsymmetRx, Inc. v. Biocare Med., LLC, 2009-1094, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20756, September 18, 2009, Decided
2. Prometheus Labs., Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Servs., 2008-1403, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20623, September 16, 2009, Decided
3. Vita-Mix Corp. v. Basic Holding, Inc., 2008-1479, -1517, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20622, September 16, 2009, Decided
The district court erred as a matter of law in finding that a patentee, which claimed an improved consumer food blender, had disclaimed all types of stirring in the prosecution history, which contradicted the court's prior claim construction; there was no contributory infringement under 35 U.S.C.S. § 271(c), however.
4. Rozenblat v. Kappos, 2009-1278, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20683, September 16, 2009, Decided, THIS DECISION WAS ISSUED AS UNPUBLISHED OR NONPRECEDENTIAL AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT. PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.
Non-subscribers can use lexisOne’s Free Case Law search to view the free, un-enhanced version of Rozenblat v. Kappos
5. Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd., 2009-1020, -1096, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20409, September 15, 2009, Decided
6. Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. United States DOI, No. 07-16423, UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 20380, February 10, 2009, Argued and Submitted, San Francisco, California, September 14, 2009, Filed
7. In Def. of Animals v. USDA, Civil Action No. 02-557 (RWR), UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85673, September 18, 2009, Decided, September 18, 2009, Filed
Non-subscribers can access Federal Case Law, Codes, Shepard's® Citations, Administrative, Legislative, and Secondary Sources using lexisOne’s Research Value Package.
8. Rosenthal Collins Group v. Trading Techs. Int'l, Case No.: 05-cv-4088, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85455, September 18, 2009, Decided, September 18, 2009, Filed
Non-subscribers can access Federal Case Law, Codes, Shepard's® Citations, Administrative, Legislative, and Secondary Sources using lexisOne’s Research Value Package.
9. Pool Cover Specialists Nat'L v. Cover-Pools, Case No. 2:08CV879DAK, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85570, September 18, 2009, Decided, September 18, 2009, Filed
Non-subscribers can access Federal Case Law, Codes, Shepard's® Citations, Administrative, Legislative, and Secondary Sources using lexisOne’s Research Value Package.
10. Dura Global Techs. v. Magna Donnelly Corp., Case No. 07-10945, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN, SOUTHERN DIVISION, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 85563, September 18, 2009, Decided, September 18, 2009, Filed
Non-subscribers can access Federal Case Law, Codes, Shepard's® Citations, Administrative, Legislative, and Secondary Sources using lexisOne’s Research Value Package.