28 Cited authorities

  1. KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.

    550 U.S. 398 (2007)   Cited 1,336 times   118 Legal Analyses
    Holding expert's declaration did not support finding teaching away because it did not indicate the prior art system "was somehow so flawed that there was no reason to upgrade it"
  2. Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc.

    136 S. Ct. 1923 (2016)   Cited 395 times   55 Legal Analyses
    Holding that section 284 " ‘commits the determination’ whether enhanced damages are appropriate ‘to the discretion of the district court’ "
  3. School District No. 1J, Multnomah County v. ACandS, Inc.

    5 F.3d 1255 (9th Cir. 1993)   Cited 3,822 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the "overwhelming weight of authority is that the failure to file documents in an original motion or opposition does not turn the late filed documents into 'newly discovered evidence'" for a motion for reconsideration
  4. McRo, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games Am. Inc.

    837 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2016)   Cited 244 times   50 Legal Analyses
    Holding that using "unconventional rules that relate to sub-sequences of phonemes, timings, and morph weight sets, is not directed to an abstract idea"
  5. OIP Technologies, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.

    788 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2015)   Cited 222 times   8 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a Section 101 inquiry is a question of law
  6. Resqnet.com, Inc. v. Lansa, Inc.

    594 F.3d 860 (Fed. Cir. 2010)   Cited 251 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that evidence of royalty rates from licenses without a relationship to the claimed invention could not form the basis of a reasonable royalty calculation
  7. National Metal Finishing v. Barclaysamerican

    899 F.2d 119 (1st Cir. 1990)   Cited 280 times
    Holding that motions for reconsideration may not be used "to repeat old arguments previously considered and rejected, or to raise new legal theories that should have been raised earlier"
  8. Fontenot v. Mesa Petroleum Co.

    791 F.2d 1207 (5th Cir. 1986)   Cited 250 times
    Holding that, under federal maritime law, "a court should not look beyond the written language of the contract to determine the intent of the parties unless the disputed language is ambiguous"
  9. Koito Manufacturing Co., v. Turn-Key-Tech

    381 F.3d 1142 (Fed. Cir. 2004)   Cited 128 times
    Holding that a challenger failed to meet its burden of proving a prior art reference anticipated the patent claims when it "failed to provide any testimony or other evidence that would demonstrate to the jury how that reference met the limitations of the claims"
  10. Golden Blount, Inc. v. Robert H. Peterson

    438 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2006)   Cited 119 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the defendant committed direct infringement in the instances that it assembled the components itself into the complete patented product, and that it committed indirect infringement when it provided the components to its customers along with directions as to how to assemble them into the patented product
  11. Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 59   Cited 34,411 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Providing 28-day filing period
  12. Rule 52 - Findings and Conclusions by the Court; Judgment on Partial Findings

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 52   Cited 22,409 times   86 Legal Analyses
    Recognizing that a "reviewing court must give due regard to the trial court's opportunity to judge the witnesses' credibility"
  13. Rule 50 - Judgment as a Matter of Law in a Jury Trial; Related Motion for a New Trial; Conditional Ruling

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 50   Cited 11,975 times   60 Legal Analyses
    Allowing a court to award judgment as a matter of law if "the court finds that a reasonable jury would not have a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to find for the party on that issue"