8 Cited authorities

Microsoft Corp. v. I4I Limited Partnership
564 U.S. 91 (2011) Cited 1,170 times 18 Legal Analyses
Holding that § 282 ’s presumption of validity in litigation imposes a clear and convincing evidence standard on defendants seeking to prove invalidity
White v. Ford Motor Co.
312 F.3d 998 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 194 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior accident when the testimony was "somewhat ambiguous" as to whether the prior accident was caused by a manufacturing defect or the design defect at issue in the case
Power-One Inc. v. Artesyn Technologies, Inc.
599 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2010) Cited 145 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding that a claim is not indefinite if "the meaning of the claim is discernible, even though the task may be formidable and the conclusions may be one over which reasonable persons will disagree."
Geo M. Martin Co. v. Alliance Machine Systems International LLC
618 F.3d 1294 (Fed. Cir. 2010) Cited 68 times 1 Legal Analyses
Providing that evidence of commercial success "carries little weight" where it may be ascribed to "pre-existing market share"
CFMT, Inc. v. Yieldup Intern. Corp.
349 F.3d 1333 (Fed. Cir. 2003) Cited 78 times 3 Legal Analyses
Finding no material misrepresentation in part because a PTO examiner's reasons for allowance did not reflect that the PTO relied on the allegedly false applicant statements
Velander v. Garner
348 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2003) Cited 60 times 2 Legal Analyses
Reviewing the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences' finding of a reasonable expectation of success under a "substantial evidence" standard
In re Gulack
703 F.2d 1381 (Fed. Cir. 1983) Cited 31 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that even though the claim included printed matter, the printed matter was still entitled to patentable weight because there was a functional relationship between the printed matter and its underlying substrate
Rule 5 - Serving and Filing Pleadings and Other Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 5 Cited 22,753 times 16 Legal Analyses
Allowing service by filing papers with the court's electronic-filing system

Broadcom Corporation v. Emulex Corporation

8 Cited authorities

Holding that § 282 ’s presumption of validity in litigation imposes a clear and convincing evidence standard on defendants seeking to prove invalidity

Holding that the district court did not err in admitting evidence of a prior accident when the testimony was "somewhat ambiguous" as to whether the prior accident was caused by a manufacturing defect or the design defect at issue in the case

Finding that a claim is not indefinite if "the meaning of the claim is discernible, even though the task may be formidable and the conclusions may be one over which reasonable persons will disagree."

Providing that evidence of commercial success "carries little weight" where it may be ascribed to "pre-existing market share"

Finding no material misrepresentation in part because a PTO examiner's reasons for allowance did not reflect that the PTO relied on the allegedly false applicant statements

Reviewing the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences' finding of a reasonable expectation of success under a "substantial evidence" standard

Holding that even though the claim included printed matter, the printed matter was still entitled to patentable weight because there was a functional relationship between the printed matter and its underlying substrate

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