For our weekly SoCal IP Institute meeting on Monday, August 28, 2017, we will discuss the following cases:
Georgetown Rail v. Holland., (Federal Circuit August 14, 2017) (available here). Georgetown Rail owned a patent for a method of inspecting railroad tie-plates and automating the examination of misaligned tie plates. Holland infringed the patent and Georgetown sued. The district court found Holland willfully infringed and awarded enhanced damages. The CAFC affirmed.
Nidec Motor v. Zhongshan Broad Ocean Motor, (Federal Circuit August 22, 2017) (available here). Nidec Motor sued Broad Ocean on a patent for a low-noise air conditioning system. An IPR was instituted in which two pieces of prior art were examined. A third piece of Japanese prior art was not admitted because Broad Ocean had not filed the proper affidavit for attesting to the accuracy of its translation in time. Broad Ocean tried to file a second IPR (this time with the missing affidavit) and join it with the first IPR, but the Board found the second IPR was time barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). The CAFC interpreted the issue to be whether the time bar provision allows a time-barred petitioner to add new issues. The court found, “[w]e think it unlikely that Congress intended that petitioners could employ the joinder provision to circumvent the time bar by adding time-barred issues to an otherwise timely proceeding.”
All are invited to join us on August 28, 2017, at noon in our Westlake Village office. This activity is approved for 1 hour of MCLE credit. If you will be joining us, please RSVP to Nicole Abeloe by 9 am Monday morning.
Leave A Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.