§Why CasetextPricing

Lucent Technologies, Inc. et al v. Gateway, Inc. et al

REPLY re Response in Opposition to Motion,,, for Partial Summary Judgment of No Willful Infringement of the Asserted Claims of U.S. Patnet Nos. 4,439,759

3 Cited authorities

  1. In re Seagate Technology

    497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 792 times   86 Legal Analyses
    Holding that an "advice of counsel" defense to willful infringement does not waive the attorney-client privilege as to trial counsel partly because post-filing conduct is usually not relevant to a finding of willful infringement

  2. Texas Instruments v. U.S. Intl. Trade Com'n

    805 F.2d 1558 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 146 times
    Holding that to infringe a claim, the accused device must embody every element of the claim as properly interpreted

  3. Hutchins v. Zoll Medical Corp.

    492 F.3d 1377 (Fed. Cir. 2007)   Cited 27 times
    Holding “stay calm,” “if no pulse, start CPR,” and “give two breaths” were each “fragmentary phrases” not subject to copyright