On July 19, 2018, the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, denied a permanent injunction requested by Illumina, Inc, and instead ruled that a forward looking royalty for continued non-voluntary use of the invention, a type of compulsory license,… Continue Reading
This is an update to a 2007 report regarding a district court decision in the Innogenetics v. Abbott case here, regarding Abbott’s infringement of Innogenetics’s patents for HCV genotyping. The previous blog discusses the ruling at the district court level… Continue Reading
https://www.keionline.org/?s=injunction Selected U.S. Patent Injunction Cases 2017. Wisconsin Alumni Research Foundation v. APPLE, INC., Dist. Court, WD Wisconsin 2017 At the end of the day, the court concludes that WARF has not met its burden of demonstrating irreparable harm, and… Continue Reading
On Saturday, August 3, 2013, USTR head Ambassador Michael B. G. Froman wrote to the Chairman of the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), to “disapprove the USITC’s determination to issue an exclusion order and cease and desist order” for Apple Inc. “smart phones and tablet computers that infringe a U.S. patent owned by Samsung Electronics,” in the ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-794. Continue Reading
In April of 2010, District Judge Timothy J. Corrigan (M.D Florida, Jacksonville division) declined to grant a permanent injunction following a finding that the Johnson & Johnson’s ACUVUE®OASYS contact lens product infringed patents owned by CIBA Vision Corporation, providing another example of, in effect, a judicial compulsory license following the 2006 eBay v. MercExchange case; the judge wrote: