Corporate Counsel
  • Home
  • News
  • Surveys
  • Resources
  • Lawjobs
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Bookstore
  • Contact

Topics » IP Insider | Labor & Employment | From the Experts | On the Job | Moves | DC Watch | International

Home > Trolls, Smartphones, and Red Heels

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Trolls, Smartphones, and Red Heels

2012 was another banner year for IP litigation. Here are our top hits.

By Lisa Shuchman All Articles 

Corporate Counsel

February 1, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Intellectual property kept its place in the public spotlight in 2012, with patent trolls running rampant and smartphone wars that seemed to never end.

These big stories, with their technology-based patents in dispute, naturally dominated the headlines. But battles over gadgets weren't the only actions in court. Companies skirmished over biomedical and life sciences patents, too. And other court battles featured copyrights and the definition of what constitutes "fair use" in an age of ever-changing technology.

The U.S. Supreme Court took an active interest in IP in 2012, issuing some important decisions and granting cert to several more. This was also the year in which the U.S. patent system underwent the second phase of the first major patent reform in half a century.

With IP growing in prominence and importance both to businesses and to the general public, it's difficult to single out the most important cases of 2012. But here, we present our view of the top IP litigation wins of the past year.

Prometheus Bound

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories Inc. sent shock waves through IP circles. In a unanimous ruling, the court struck down two patents that Prometheus, a unit of Nestle SA, had sought to enforce against Mayo Laboratories, concluding that the patent claims were directed to underlying laws of nature and therefore not eligible for patent protection.

The patents in question concerned a method for monitoring a patient's blood to determine the best drug dosage. Prometheus markets a diagnostic test that uses the technology covered by the two patents to help doctors monitor patients' with certain gastrointestinal disorders and autoimmune illnesses. A unit of the Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Minnesota, argued that the method used to determine dosage was a natural phenomenon and therefore not patentable. The justices agreed.

Many patent experts lamented the decision, saying it would lead to the demise of diagnostic-method patents and affect the profitability of personalized medicine. The patents' opponents, meanwhile, had argued that allowing the patent to stand would have hampered medical research.

Legal reverberations from Prometheus were almost immediate. Within a week of the decision, the Supreme Court sent a separate case concerning the patentability of human genes— The Association of Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics Inc.— back to the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals for reevaluation in light of its decision in Prometheus . But in a move that illustrates the often-conflicting views of the Federal Circuit and the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit once again ruled in the remanded case that an isolated piece of human genetic code can be patented.

The Myriad case concerns the Utah-based company's patents on genes that correlate with increased risk of hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. Scientists and doctors challenged the patents, saying they impede their ability to conduct research and help patients. The American Medical Association, AARP, and women's health groups all filed amicus briefs supporting the plaintiffs.

Now the Myriad case is back in the hands of the Supreme Court, which in December announced it would hear the case. The legal question the justices will answer is whether isolated genes are "products of nature" that may not be patented or "human-made inventions" eligible for patent protection.

The Endless Proxy War

Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. has become synonymous with the seemingly endless smartphone wars dominating the patent litigation landscape. It was the first of a series of lawsuits being fought worldwide between Apple and Samsung regarding the applications and design of smartphones and tablets—a fight many believe boils down to a proxy war between Apple and Google, creator of the popular Android operating system.

In this highly publicized case, which The Wall Street Journal dubbed "The Patent Trial of the Century," Apple accused Samsung of infringing its utility and design patents, and Samsung countersued, claiming Apple infringed its patents. In August, after a three-week trial and three days of deliberations in federal district court in San Jose, California, the jury came back with its verdict. It found that Samsung's mobile devices infringed six of Apple's patents, and Apple's devices did not infringe any of Samsung's patents. It awarded Apple $1.05 billion in damages.

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Next



Subscribe to Corporate Counsel

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • Vringo
  • Louboutin
  • companies?Lycos
  • All Back Home
  • Endless Proxy War Apple
  • Yves Saint Laurent America Inc. Both
  • Protect
  • Facetime
  • Android
  • VirnetX
  • Lycos Inc.
  • American Association of Retired Persons
  • Second Circuit
  • P Engine
  • Siemens Enterprise Communications
  • Face Apple
  • Nemours and Company
  • Wall Street Journal
  • Eolas Technologies
  • Association of Molecular Pathology
  • Mayo Collaborative Services
  • Apple Inc.
  • Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Yahoo! Inc.
  • Patent and Trademark Office
  • University of California
  • Myriad Genetics Inc.
  • Nestle SA
  • Google Inc.
  • Adobe Systems Inc.
  • Microsoft Corporation
  • AOL LLC
  • U.S. International Trade Commission
  • Avaya Inc.
  • Cisco Systems, Inc.
  • Amazon.com, Inc.
  • American Medical Association
  • Maigh Eo Laboratories
  • Prometheus Laboratories
  • Monsanto Company
  • Samsung Electronics Company Inc.
  • Mayo Clinic
  • Supreme Court
  • U.S. Court of Appeals

Key categories

    
  • Corporate & Business Law

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Best Legal Departments 2013
    •      
  2. Bloomberg Names Compliance Chief After Client Data Breach
    •      
  3. Facebook's General Counsel is Leaving Company
    •      
  4. Wage-and-Hour Suits Up for Fifth Straight Year
    •      
  5. 6 Things In-House Counsel Must Know About E-Discovery
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

3-D Printing: The Next Big Thing in IP Law?

Best Legal Departments 2013

News Corp. Hires Ex-Skadden Communications Chief Bush

Law Firm Leaders' Confidence Slipping, Says Survey

Contrite Companies Can Win Forgiveness in Bribery Cases
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Plaintiffs Want to See Toyota's 'Crown Jewels'
  •      
    • Subscription Required

CEIC: the Destination for Digital Investigation

Using Computer Forensics to Investigate IP Theft

Prolific ADA Plaintiff Faces Nemesis in Harassment Suit

Ullyot Exit Closes Chapter for Facebook
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Rothstein Bankruptcy Trustee Files New Reorganization Plan
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Fla. Bar Wants Disbarment for Former Judge
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Bar Candidate Quits N.Y. Job To Satisfy N.J. Practice Bylaw

Pro Bono Work Proposed as Condition for Bar Admission
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Judge in Stop-and-Frisk Case Relishes Her Independence

Ground Is Shifting in 14-Year Litigation

Third Circuit Rejects NLRB Recess Appointment

Judges Weigh Delaware Court of Chancery's Arbitration Program
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Law Schools Are Looking Beyond LSATs, Says Mich. Dean

Is Freezing Your Eggs the Solution?

Litigator of the Week: Who Needs a Jury Consultant?
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sanction Reversed; Filing of Sexually Explicit Chat OKd
  •      
    • Subscription Required

DeKalb Judge Dismisses, Then Recuses

Jury Finds For Attorney In Legal-Mal Case
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corporate Bribery Case Part Of National Trend
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Court Continues To Grant Lawyers Fraud Immunity
  •      
    • Subscription Required

  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media