Three days ago, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear German software giant SAP’s appeal of a $345 million patent judgment, according to a story in Reuters.
SAP will have to pay the patent infringement judgment, which has now grown to $391 million due to accrued interest, even though the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board is reviewing the validity of the patents at issue.
The general feeling among attorneys is that MPHJ Technology Investments LLC’s recently filed lawsuit against the Federal Trade Commission is doomed. This at least according to a recent piece in Law360.
MPHJ, you will remember, is truly the troll’s troll. It sues young and old, thin and not-so thin, for-profit and not-so-for-profit to assert its rights in scanner technologies. It has provoked the righteous indignation of attorneys-general in Nebraska and Vermont, and has even irked POTUS.
What is the business of the Federal Circuit? What should it be? And how do decisions at the CAFC—and wider developments in patent law—affect America’s ability to compete in the global marketplace?
From the day of its inception in October of 1982, the role and rulings of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, a court of limited subject matter jurisdiction but a nationwide reach, have been the subject of much debate.
“My learned lord, we pray you to proceed
And justly and religiously unfold
Why the law Salique that they have in France
Or should, or should not, bar us in our claim….”
Wm. Shakespeare, The Historie of Henry V
At the beginning of Shakespeare’s Henry V, young King Henry is looking for a pretext upon which to invade France.
Law360’s Lynne Chiem is reporting today on the Federal Circuit Bar Association’s lack of comfort with the proposed legislation seeking to combat so-called patent trolls, in Fed. Circ. Bar Says Anti-‘Patent Troll’ Bill Worrisome.
I’m a member of the FCBA and I share the discomfort. The Association’s letter to Reps. Goodlatte and Conyers is overdue. It’s not the place of Congress to get involved with the conduct of Article III courts, and the courts have tools to address abusive litigation.
Alice is in line to get a look in the Supreme Court’s mirror. What will she see?
Long-time commentator Lyle Denniston has just published a short piece on SCOTUSblog.com about what promises to be a critically important patent ruling at the Supreme Court, in Alice Corporation v. CLS Bank International.
Former Federal Circuit Chief Judge Paul Michel is concerned about the pending legislative actions intended to curb the actions of so-called “patent trolls.”
Check out this news piece on Law360.com.
The Federal Circuit under Judge Michel achieved a measured and thoughtful approach to patent appeals—and a deep appreciation for the importance of innovation in American business.
A worthwhile perspective from Michael M. Rosen in The American magazine, a publication of the American Enterprise Institute. Rosen, an attorney, notes among other things:
[A]nti-troll forces have fought back in the courts, state legislatures, and Congress, all in an effort to defang the beast. But while some of these measures are appropriate, others go too far.
