12 Cited authorities

Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.
477 U.S. 242 (1986) Cited 236,174 times 38 Legal Analyses
Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"
Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
477 U.S. 317 (1986) Cited 216,278 times 40 Legal Analyses
Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"
Net Moneyin v. Verisign
545 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2008) Cited 278 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that, to anticipate, a single prior art reference must not only disclose all the limitations claimed but also must disclose those limitations "arranged or combined in the same way as recited in the claim"
Aero Products v. Intex Recreation
466 F.3d 1000 (Fed. Cir. 2006) Cited 68 times
Holding that plaintiff who prevailed on patent infringement and Lanham Act claims arising from same operative facts, i.e., infringement of patent, could not have double recovery of damages
Leggett v. Vutek
537 F.3d 1349 (Fed. Cir. 2008) Cited 45 times 2 Legal Analyses
Affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment of invalidity based on a finding that the claimed patent was anticipated by prior art
Cie v. Gnosis S. P.A.
808 F.3d 829 (Fed. Cir. 2015) Cited 33 times 1 Legal Analyses
Making inferences from context of prior art references about what a POSITA would have understood
Precision Fabrics Grp., Inc. v. Tietex Int'l, Ltd.
1:13-cv-645 (M.D.N.C. Nov. 21, 2016) Cited 9 times 2 Legal Analyses
Noting that the Federal Circuit has advised caution in applying the doctrine of equivalents, reminding courts that it is the terms of the claims, and not the products themselves, that are the focus of the inquiry
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 328,681 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,023 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system
Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
35 U.S.C. § 102 Cited 5,937 times 944 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"
Section 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses
35 U.S.C. § 282 Cited 3,896 times 133 Legal Analyses
Granting a presumption of validity to patents
Section 316 - Conduct of inter partes review
35 U.S.C. § 316 Cited 276 times 307 Legal Analyses
Stating that "the petitioner shall have the burden of proving a proposition of unpatentability"

Sound View Innovations, LLC v. Hulu, LLC

12 Cited authorities

Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

Holding that a movant's summary judgment motion should be granted "against a [nonmovant] who fails to make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of an element essential to that party's case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial"

Holding that, to anticipate, a single prior art reference must not only disclose all the limitations claimed but also must disclose those limitations "arranged or combined in the same way as recited in the claim"

Holding that plaintiff who prevailed on patent infringement and Lanham Act claims arising from same operative facts, i.e., infringement of patent, could not have double recovery of damages

Affirming the district court's grant of summary judgment of invalidity based on a finding that the claimed patent was anticipated by prior art

Making inferences from context of prior art references about what a POSITA would have understood

Noting that the Federal Circuit has advised caution in applying the doctrine of equivalents, reminding courts that it is the terms of the claims, and not the products themselves, that are the focus of the inquiry

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"

Granting a presumption of validity to patents

Stating that "the petitioner shall have the burden of proving a proposition of unpatentability"