43 Cited authorities

Ashcroft v. Iqbal
556 U.S. 662 (2009) Cited 254,292 times 279 Legal Analyses
Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable
Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly
550 U.S. 544 (2007) Cited 268,073 times 366 Legal Analyses
Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "
Medimmune, Inc. v. GenenTech, Inc.
549 U.S. 118 (2007) Cited 2,550 times 90 Legal Analyses
Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"
Wilton v. Seven Falls Co.
515 U.S. 277 (1995) Cited 4,308 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that in declaratory judgment actions, district courts have “greater” discretion to abstain than under Colorado River's “exceptional circumstances” test
Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc.
572 U.S. 545 (2014) Cited 1,390 times 122 Legal Analyses
Holding that an "exceptional" case under § 285 is "one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a party's litigating position ... or the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated"
Cardinal Chem. Co. v. Morton Int'l, Inc.
508 U.S. 83 (1993) Cited 608 times 16 Legal Analyses
Holding appeal was not moot where sole issue remaining was request for declaratory relief
Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth
300 U.S. 227 (1937) Cited 3,453 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that a request for a declaratory judgment regarding an insured's disability was justiciable
R+L Carriers, Inc. v. Drivertech LLC (In re Bill of Lading Transmission & Processing Sys. Patent Litig.)
681 F.3d 1323 (Fed. Cir. 2012) Cited 656 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that pleading "the process for" using the accused product in an infringing way "has no other substantial non-infringing use" is not the same as pleading the accused product contains a component that can only infringe, and therefore fails to state a claim for contributory infringement
McZeal v. Sprint Nextel Corp.
501 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 2007) Cited 411 times 12 Legal Analyses
Holding that a direct infringement claim made in accordance with Form 16 (now Form 18) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure meets the Twombly pleading standard
Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Barr Labs., Inc.
40 F.3d 1223 (Fed. Cir. 1994) Cited 286 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding that a reduction to practice by a third party inures to the benefit of the inventor even without communication of the conception
Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing
Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 Cited 347,506 times 923 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Section 2201 - Creation of remedy
28 U.S.C. § 2201 Cited 24,602 times 61 Legal Analyses
Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment
Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty
35 U.S.C. § 102 Cited 5,941 times 958 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"
Section 101 - Inventions patentable
35 U.S.C. § 101 Cited 3,415 times 2195 Legal Analyses
Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."
Section 285 - Attorney fees
35 U.S.C. § 285 Cited 3,203 times 480 Legal Analyses
Granting district courts discretion to award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases
Section 256 - Correction of named inventor
35 U.S.C. § 256 Cited 664 times 63 Legal Analyses
Permitting correction of inventorship "[w]henever . . . through error an inventor is not named in an issued patent and such error arose without any deceptive intention on his part"
Section 292 - False marking
35 U.S.C. § 292 Cited 565 times 61 Legal Analyses
Providing cause of action and share of recovery against a person falsely marking patented articles
Section 252 - Effect of reissue
35 U.S.C. § 252 Cited 290 times 22 Legal Analyses
Stating that a reissued patent shall have the same effect as the original patent “in so far as the claims of the original and reissued patents are substantially identical ”

Ecojet, Inc. v. Pure Spa Components, Inc. et al

43 Cited authorities

Holding that a claim is plausible where a plaintiff's allegations enable the court to draw a "reasonable inference" the defendant is liable

Holding that a complaint's allegations should "contain sufficient factual matter, accepted as true, to 'state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face' "

Holding "the phrase 'case of actual controversy' in the Act refers to the types of 'Cases' and 'Controversies' that are justiciable under Article III"

Holding that in declaratory judgment actions, district courts have “greater” discretion to abstain than under Colorado River's “exceptional circumstances” test

Holding that an "exceptional" case under § 285 is "one that stands out from others with respect to the substantive strength of a party's litigating position ... or the unreasonable manner in which the case was litigated"

Holding appeal was not moot where sole issue remaining was request for declaratory relief

Holding that a request for a declaratory judgment regarding an insured's disability was justiciable

Holding that pleading "the process for" using the accused product in an infringing way "has no other substantial non-infringing use" is not the same as pleading the accused product contains a component that can only infringe, and therefore fails to state a claim for contributory infringement

Holding that a direct infringement claim made in accordance with Form 16 (now Form 18) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure meets the Twombly pleading standard

Holding that a reduction to practice by a third party inures to the benefit of the inventor even without communication of the conception

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Granting district courts the authority to create a remedy with the force of a final judgment

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

Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."

Granting district courts discretion to award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases

Permitting correction of inventorship "[w]henever . . . through error an inventor is not named in an issued patent and such error arose without any deceptive intention on his part"

Providing cause of action and share of recovery against a person falsely marking patented articles

Stating that a reissued patent shall have the same effect as the original patent “in so far as the claims of the original and reissued patents are substantially identical ”