Cases that Cite 28 USC §1498 (1912 to April 2018)
 Share
The version of the browser you are using is no longer supported. Please upgrade to a supported browser.Dismiss

 
View only
 
 
ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ
1
TitlePrimary CiteParallel Cites
Court or Jurisdiction
Docket Number(s)DateNOD Topics
Document Summary
Terms
2
CellCast Technologies, LLC v. United States2018 WL 4088503, *2Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-1307C )8/28/2018
Pending before the Court are two related motions---one, a motion by the defendants to compel depositions pursuant to Rule 37(a) of the Rules of the United States Court of Federal...
the current deadline---a fact which has not been established---these costs are likely reimbursable in the event the plaintiffs succeed in this lawsuit. See )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
. As the plaintiffs have pointed to no particularized prejudice they will suffer from the depositions going forward, and the defendants have adequately)
3
Mynette Technologies, Inc. v. United States2018 WL 3954727, *3+Fed.Cl.(NO. 16-1647 )8/17/2018
To facilitate review of this Memorandum Opinion And Order, the court has provided the following outline. I.  RELEVANT FACTUAL BACKGROUND. II.  PROCEDURAL HISTORY. III. DISCUSSION....
of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same [seeking] recovery of reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The March 30, 2018 Second Amended Complaint alleges that the ''United States, acting through the [United States] Department of State, the)
4
Click-To-Call Technologies, LP v. Ingenio, Inc., YellowPages.com, LLC--- F.3d ----
2018 WL 3893119, *6
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2015-1242 )8/16/2018
PATENTS - Patent and Trademark Office. Intervening ex parte reexamination of patent did not preclude application of statutory time bar to initiate inter partes review proceeding.
because ''Congress could have easily specified the phrase 'sued for infringement' to require being sued for infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 or otherwise excluded [ )
28 U.S.C.] § 1498)
suits from the definition of 'sued for infringement,' but it did not do so''b. Legislative History The legislative history of §)
5
Davidson v. United States138 Fed.Cl. 159, 161+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-942C )6/29/2018
COPYRIGHTS - Art and Architecture. Replica of Statute of Liberty located in front of Las Vegas casino was an original, creative work that was subject of valid copyright...
these will not be employed as an artificial inflator nor deflator of the fair market value at the time the negotiation would have taken place. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(b))
[16]99 Copyrights and Intellectual Property 99I Copyrights 99I(J) Infringement 99I(J)2 Remedies 99 72 Actions for Infringement 99 87)
6
TecSec, Inc. v. Adobe Systems Inc.2018 WL 3059868, *1+E.D.Va.(NO. 1:10-CV-115 )6/19/2018
Background:  Patentee brought action against alleged infringer, alleging infringement of patent covering computer security system. Patentee moved for partial summary judgment of...
of that product was developed in response to a contract with the federal government and for its use, as required for defense of government sales. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498)
[13]291 Patents 291 k.The coverage of the statute codifying the government sales defense and presenting an affirmative defense to patent)
7
FastShip, LLC v. United States892 F.3d 1298, 1298+
127 U.S.P.Q.2d 1165, 1165+
Fed.Cir.
(NO. 2017-2248 , 2017-2249 )
6/5/2018
PATENTS - Jurisdiction. Product is ”manufactured” under statute on jurisdiction of Court of Federal Claims in patent cases when made to include each limitation of invention.
provides a cause of action against the United States and, at the same time, protects government contractors against infringement liability and remedies where it applies. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498)
[2]291 Patents 291IV Patent Applications and Proceedings 291IV(B) Examination 291 951 Renewal of Application 291 953 k. Continuation or divisional)
8
Ideal Innovations, Inc. v. United States138 Fed.Cl. 244, 248+Fed.Cl.(NO. 17-889C )5/31/2018
PATENTS - Limitations. Tolling of limitations period applicable to patent infringement claim against United States ended when administrative claim was denied.
suit against the United States by the owner of a United States patent to recover compensation for the unauthorized use of the patented invention. See )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
Pursuant to this statute, the United States may be held liable for patent infringement if, in relevant part, a contractor for the)
9
SecurityPoint Holdings, Inc. v. United States138 Fed.Cl. 101, 101+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-268C )5/18/2018
PATENTS - Assignments and Licensing. Purported patent holder had standing to bring action for infringement of patent mistakenly assigned to related entity.
of patent ownership, and the suit is fundamentally one for damages under patent laws, the court has subject matter jurisdiction to decide preliminary contract question. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498)
[3]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court and)
10
ACME Worldwide Enterprises, Inc. v. United States137 Fed.Cl. 469, 472+Fed.Cl.(NO. 17-843C )4/11/2018
PATENTS - Parties. Intervention by alleged infringer in patentee's action against United States would not prejudice rights and would not delay adjudication.
is located in Orlando, Florida.On April 21, 2015, ACME filed a patent infringement suit against ISM in the Florida district court. ISM then asserted )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
as an affirmative defense and moved for summary judgment. In its motion for summary judgment, ISM explained that the issue was)
11
Golden v. United States137 Fed.Cl. 155, 167+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-307C )3/29/2018
PATENTS - Biotechnology. Federal agency's funding grants did not establish subject matter jurisdiction over patent infringement claims against federal government.
by the government directly and/or (2) unlicensed use or manufacture of a patented invention for the government and with the government's authorization or consent. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[21]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
12
Haddad v. United States136 Fed.Cl. 572, 577+Fed.Cl.(NO. 17-307 )2/28/2018
PATENTS - Assignments and Licensing. Patentee's right to sue United States for patent infringement was barred by Anti-Assignment of Claims Act until date of agreement returning his...
a patent of the United States is used or manufactured by or for the United States without license of the owner thereof or lawful right. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[9]291 Patents 291VI Patent Rights and Duties 291VI(C) Assignments and Other Transfers 291 1475 k. Rights and liabilities of)
13
Bondyopadhyay v. United States136 Fed.Cl. 114, 121+Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-147C )2/9/2018
PATENTS - Telecommunications. Claims of patent directed to geodesic sphere phased array antenna system used for satellite communications was not directly infringed.
on November 8, 2017, and the matter is now ripe for disposition.Discussion Jurisdiction This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
, which provides in relevant part:Whenever an invention described in and covered by a patent of the United States is used)
14
Rohland v. United States136 Fed.Cl. 55, 69Fed.Cl.(NO. 17-1175C )1/26/2018
GOVERNMENT - United States. State prisoner's suit seeking $1 billion from federal government for constitutional violations and breach of contract was jurisdictionally barred.
Particular Claims, Jurisdiction 393 1007 k. Patents, use or infringement.Court of Federal Claims has jurisdiction to entertain patent infringement claims against the federal government. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[45]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
15
Jackson v. Climmer2018 WL 438926, *2D.Or.
(NO. 3:17-CV-01062-SB )
1/16/2018
United States Magistrate Judge Stacie F. Beckerman issued Findings and Recommendation in this case on November 22, 2107. ECF 24. Judge Beckerman recommended that Defendants' motion...
he sought copyright registration in his Complaint or the attached documentation. Thus, this court lacks jurisdiction over any claims plaintiff might be asserting pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
With respect to Plaintiff's motion for money damages (ECF 22), this relates to Plaintiff's copyright claim. Accordingly, this motion is denied)
16
American Innotek, Inc. v. United States706 Fed.Appx. 686, 686Fed.Cir.(NO. 2017-1178 )12/19/2017
American Innotek, Inc., owns U.S. Patent 5,116,139. It sued the United States in the Court of Federal Claims under 28 U.S.C. § 1498, asserting that the government was using the...
Stoll, Circuit Judges.Taranto, Circuit Judge.American Innotek, Inc., owns U.S. Patent 5,116,139 It sued the United States in the Court of Federal Claims under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
, asserting that the government was using the subject matter of claims 1–4 and 17 of the patent without a license from)
17
Min Yu Xiao v. United States2017 WL 5247434, *2Fed.Cl.
(NO. 17-1061C (PRO SE) )
11/13/2017
Pro se plaintiff Min Yu Xiao filed a complaint in this court on August 3, 2017. In it, Mr. Min states that he is an “83–year-old ․ U.S. Citizen [who] does not speak English.” He...
the appropriate use and publication fees. It does not mandate the payment of money by the federal government. Moreover, although not mentioned by Mr. Min, )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
, the jurisdictional statute providing this court with authority to resolve allegations of patent infringement against the United States, does not provide the)
18
Sacchetti v. United States
711 Fed.Appx. 979, 979+
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2017-1484 )10/6/2017
GOVERNMENT - Tort Claims. Claim that government infringed on patent for dual handset telephones was barred by six-year limitations period to file claims against government.
limitations period to file claims against the government began to run, when government began to use owners' patented dual-handset telephones to provide interpretation service. )
28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1498)
2501 291 Patents 291X Patents Enumerated 291 2092 k. Design.US Patent D382,264. Cited.291 Patents 291X Patents Enumerated 291 2091)
19
Crye Precision LLC v. Bennettsville Printing2017 WL 4325817, *4E.D.N.Y.
(NO. 15CV00221FBRER )
9/27/2017
Crye Precision LLC and its sister company Lineweight LLC (collectively, “Crye”) sued Bennettsville Printing (“Bennettsville”) for breach of contract; trade dress infringement under...
Complaint on January 15, 2015. On August 27, 2015, the Court dismissed Crye's state law claims for unjust enrichment and unfair competition as precluded by )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
. On June 17, 2016, Crye filed its Amended Complaint, which included claims for (1) declaratory relief; (2) breach of the 2014)
20
Morphotrust USA, LLC v. United States2017 WL 4081812, *1Fed.Cl.(NO. 16-227C )9/15/2017
Pending is defendant's July 5, 2017 motion for leave of court to notice an additional third party, Logistics Systems Incorporated (“LSI”), pursuant to Rule 14(b). We previously...
is unnecessary. Because defendant has not shown good cause, we deny the motion for leave to give notice to LSI.This is an action under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
for recovery of compensation for the allegedly unlicensed use of plaintiff's patents with respect to certain identity cards by the U.S. Citizenship)
21
Beacon Adhesives, Inc. v. United States134 Fed.Cl. 26, 32+Fed.Cl.(NO. 16-909 )9/6/2017
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Claim terms were construed for patent directed to method of manufacturing ammunition articles comprising light-curable moisture-preventative...
of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same [seeking] recovery of reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The August 1, 2016 Complaint alleges that the Department of Defense and other agencies, without license or lawful right to use)
22
Return Mail, Inc. v. United States Postal Service868 F.3d 1350, 1355+
123 U.S.P.Q.2d 1813, 1813+
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2016-1502 )8/28/2017
126. Review, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Computers and Electronics. Postal Service was ”sued for infringement” for purpose of covered business method (CBM) review when assignee filed Claims Court suit against...
PTO to act absent petition filed by party with requisite standing and questions related to party's standing touched upon ultimate authority of PTO to act. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
35 U.S.C.A. §§ 324(e)329[4]15A Administrative Law and Procedure 15AV Judicial Review of Administrative Decisions 15AV(A) In)
23
3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United States2017 WL 3530126, *2Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-501C )8/17/2017
In this patent case, pending before the court is the government's motion for a protective order and order limiting preliminary discovery (“Def.'s Mot.”), ECF No. 157. The...
airport-related document requests because plaintiffs may only bring claims regarding potentially infringing systems that are ''used or manufactured by or for the United States.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The government next claims that the court should not include the airport security monitoring system manufactured by Hitachi Data Systems Federal)
24
Racing Optics, Inc. v. Clear Defense, LLC2017 WL 3242258, *1+M.D.N.C.(NO. 1:16-CV-288 )7/28/2017
Plaintiff, Racing Optics, Inc. (“Racing Optics”), initiated this action against Defendant, Clear Defense, LLC (“Clear Defense”), alleging patent infringement in violation of the...
35 U.S.C. § 1. (ECF No. 1.) Before the Court are four motions: (1) Clear Defense's Motion for Summary Judgment on its First Defense under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
, (ECF No. 28); (2) Racing Optics' Motion for Partial Summary Judgment to Dismiss Defendant's First Affirmative Defense under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
25
3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United States133 Fed.Cl. 273, 276+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-501C )7/26/2017
98. ---- Accrual of claim, limitations, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Assignments and Licensing. Documents regarding systems for which patent infringement claims against government were barred by Assignment of Claims Act were not...
compulsory license to a United States patent as of the instant the invention is first used or manufactured by the government. U.S. Const. Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]148 Eminent Domain 148I Nature, Extent, and Delegation of Power 148 2 What Constitutes a Taking; Police and Other Powers)
26
3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United States2017 WL 2609233, *2+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-501C )6/16/2017
Pending before the court is plaintiffs' motion to compel the government to produce documents and overrule objections (“Pls.' Mot. to Compel Def.”), ECF No. 126. Plaintiffs first...
claims based at U.S. embassies are outside the jurisdiction of this court, however, because they ''aris[e] in a foreign country'' within the meaning of )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(c))
See Leonardo v. United States, 55 Fed. Cl. 344, 354 (2003) (interpreting )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(c)
) analogously to identical language)
27
Silver Buckle Mines, Inc. v. United States132 Fed.Cl. 77, 97Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-476C )5/23/2017
GOVERNMENT - United States. Unpatented nonplacer lode mining claim holder's illegal exaction claim against United States was not barred by voluntary payment doctrine.
intervenor claims, see, e.g.M.E.S., Inc. v. United States, 104 Fed.Cl. 620, 627 (2012), or in certain patent infringement disputes involving a government contractor under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
see, e.g.Advanced Software Design Corp. v. Fed. Reserve Bank of St. Louis, 583 F.3d 1371, 1375–76 (Fed. Cir)
28
Cascades Projection LLC v. Epson America, Inc.864 F.3d 1309, 1316
122 U.S.P.Q.2d 1633, 1633
Fed.Cir.
(NO. 2017-1517 , 2017-1518 )
5/11/2017
Appellant Cascades Projection LLC filed a petition for hearing en banc. A response to the petition was invited by the court and filed by appellees Epson America, Inc. and Sony...
the government itself, without just compensation, any more than it can appropriate or use without compensation land which has been patented to a private purchaser )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
(granting the United States Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction to adjudicate patent infringement suits against the federal government under a takings)
29
Crye Precision LLC v. Duro Textiles, LLC689 Fed.Appx. 104, 1092nd Cir.(N.Y.)(NO. 16-1333-CV )5/3/2017
COMMERCIAL LAW - Contracts. Non-compete provision that was unreasonable and contrary to public policy would not be enforced, despite sophistication of the parties.
non-compete clause. The district court determined that this request was effectively a patent infringement claim that belongs in the Court of Federal Claims. See )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
. Having determined that the non-compete clause was unenforceable, we need not address this issue.CONCLUSION We have considered all of)
30
FastShip, LLC v. United States131 Fed.Cl. 592, 607+
123 U.S.P.Q.2d 1207, 1207+
Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-484C )4/28/2017
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
111. ---- Reasonable royalty rate, damages, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Transportation. Navy directly infringed patents directed to large fast ships with semi-planing monohull design and waterjet propulsion.
compulsory license to a United States patent as of the instant the invention is first used or manufactured by the government. U.S. Const. Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(B) Immunity in General 393 459 Particular Claims)
31
UUSI, LLC v. United States131 Fed.Cl. 244, 253+Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-216C )4/17/2017
PATENTS - Transportation. Patent claim terms were construed in patent assignees' lawsuit against United States for alleged infringement of patents.
the PTAB's claim constructions in its Institution Decision are subject to change.Discussion Jurisdiction The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
. That statute provides in relevant part:Whenever an invention described in and covered by a patent of the United States is)
32
Juliet Marine Systems, Inc. v. United States2017 WL 1193702, *1+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-747C )3/31/2017
The government has filed a motion for leave to amend its answer to assert a defense of patent invalidity in this case arising under the Invention Secrecy Act (the Act), 35 U.S.C....
The plain text of the Act, however, makes clear that the government may avail itself of any defense it may plead in an action under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
35 U.S.C. § 183 It is undisputed that one such defense available in an action under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
is patent)
33
Amos v. United States2017 WL 946302, *1+Fed.Cl.(NO. 16-1094C )3/10/2017
Damich, Senior Judge On September 1, 2016, Plaintiff, Carl Raymond Amos, filed a complaint pro se against the United States under claims for breach of copyright under 28 U.S.C. §...
Judge On September 1, 2016, Plaintiff, Carl Raymond Amos, filed a complaint pro se against the United States under claims for breach of copyright under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
, violations of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) (17 U.S.C. § 1203 1204), Lanham Act (15 U.S.C. § 1125), as well as)
34
United States and the Administrators of the Tulane Educational Fund v. Cytogel Pharma, LLC
2017 WL 479550, *1E.D.La.
(NO. CV 16-13987 )
2/6/2017
Before the Court is a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure filed by Counterclaim-Defendant The United States of America. ...
a)12 In its motion to dismiss, the Government argues Section 271 does not create a cause of action against the government and that, although )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
does create an infringement action for ''reasonable and entire compensation'' against the Government, Rule 13 does not permit an affirmative counterclaim seeking)
35
Hitkansut LLC v. United States130 Fed.Cl. 353, 354+Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-303C )1/27/2017
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
111. ---- Reasonable royalty rate, damages, practice and procedure
120. Interest, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Damages. Patentee was entitled to fixed $200,000 fee with no further compensation for government's compulsory nonexclusive license on patent.
compulsory license to a United States patent as of the instant the invention is first used or manufactured by the government. U.S. Const. Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and)
36
Brookwood Companies, Inc. v. Alston & Bird LLP49 N.Y.S.3d 10, 11+
146 A.D.3d 662, 662+ 2017 N.Y. Slip Op. 00535, 00535+
N.Y.A.D. 1 Dept.
(NO. 2482 , 653723/14 )
1/26/2017
TORTS - Negligence. Law firm's evidentiary decision to rely on patentee's expert was reasonable course of action.
there were no other known noninfringing methods of complying with government's specifications, would have made difference in disposition of motion was, at best, unduly speculative. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
Fed.Rules Civ.Proc.Rule 56, 28 U.S.C.A[4]45 Attorney and Client 45III Duties and Liabilities of Attorney to Client 45 109 k)
37
Bondyopadhyay v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 793, 800+Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-147C )1/18/2017
PATENTS - Telecommunications. Claim term was construed for patent directed to geodesic sphere phased array antenna system that was allegedly infringed by United States Air Force.
subarray of planar antenna element units.Def.'s Br. App., at GA136–37.Discussion Jurisdiction This Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
, which provides in relevant part:Whenever an invention described in and covered by a patent of the United States is used)
38
American Innotek, Inc. v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 444, 445Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-223C )12/5/2016
PATENTS - Consumer Goods. Patentee lacked extraordinary circumstances justifying relief from final judgment that claimed patent was invalid as obvious.
this Court's judgment finding Claims 1–4, and 17 of U.S. Patent No. 5,116,139 invalid as obvious and denying Plaintiff's claim of patent infringement under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498 (2012))
Am. Innotek, Inc. v. United States, 128 Fed.Cl. 135, 168–69 Plaintiff argues that this Court erred in finding invalidity because)
39
Bruhn Newtech, Inc. v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 656, 668+Fed.Cl.(NO. 16-783C )12/2/2016
50. Government ownership of patent, patents
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS - Performance and Breach. Contractor adequately stated breach contract claim against Marine Corps for transferring copies of software to armed forces of South...
corporation all copyrights and other proprietary interests in software and that only afforded contractor non-exclusive right to sell, market, lease, demonstrate, or distribute software. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(b))
[11]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(B) Immunity in General 393 459 Particular Claims)
40
Advanced Aerospace Technologies, Inc. v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 525, 528+Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-85 C )11/30/2016
51. Government employees, patents
PATENTS - Industrial Equipment. Government employment or service jurisdictional bar did not apply to patent infringement action against United States.
of the Court of Federal Claims over a patent infringement suit must be evaluated in light of the scope of each asserted patent claim individually. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[10]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
41
Golden v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 630, 635+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-307C )11/30/2016
43. Use or manufacture, patents
49. ---- Miscellaneous cases, authorization or consent, patents
PATENTS - Parties. Manufacture and use of accused device was ”for the Government,” as required for Court of Federal Claims to have jurisdiction.
giving the Court of Federal Claims jurisdiction to adjudicate patent infringement claims against the United States if it is for the benefit of the Government. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[4]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
42
Sacchetti v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 307, 319+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-1399C )11/16/2016
98. ---- Accrual of claim, limitations, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Parties. Executor of deceased plaintiff's estate was not a proper party, and thus could not be substituted for deceased plaintiff in action against Government.
In general.A cause of action alleging patent infringement against the Government and its contractors accrues when the accused instrumentality is first available for use. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[21]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
43
Jeter v. President of the United States670 Fed.Appx. 493, 4939th Cir.(Nev.)(NO. 15-15416 )11/2/2016
Adele T. Jeter, a.k.a. Adele Jeter–Wheaton, appeals pro se from the district court's judgment dismissing for lack of subject matter jurisdiction her action alleging copyright...
United States and individuals acting on behalf of the United States, and the Court of Federal Claims therefore has exclusive jurisdiction over those claims. See )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
The district court properly dismissed Jeter's tort and unjust enrichment claims because Jeter failed to show that she exhausted her administrative)
44
Securitypoint Holdings, Inc. v. United States129 Fed.Cl. 25, 28Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-268C )10/28/2016
PATENTS - Industrial Equipment. Patent teaching system of recycling trays through security screening checkpoints by use of movable carts was valid as nonobvious .
Patent validity; Obviousness; Graham factors; Secondary considerations; Objective indicia of nonobviousness; hindsight bias.OPINION BRUGGINK, Judge.This is a patent infringement action brought pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498 (2012))
Plaintiff, SecurityPoint Holdings, Inc. (''SecurityPoint''), alleges that the Transportation Security Administration (''TSA'') has infringed claims 1-4, 6-9, and 12)
45
Haddad v. United States128 Fed.Cl. 373, 374+Fed.Cl.
(NO. 15-1139C , 15-1140C )
9/30/2016
PATENTS - Industrial Equipment. Assignor of patent related to airport vehicular gate entry access system lacked standing to pursue patent infringement claims against United States.
failed to establish ownership of patent at inception of his lawsuit, as he had transferred all his rights in patent prior to filing infringement claims. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
291 Patents 291X Patents Enumerated 291 2091 k. In general; utility.US Patent 7,639,844. Cited.Patent Infringement, 28 U.S.C. § 1498)
46
Proxtronics Dosimetry, LLC v. United States128 Fed.Cl. 656, 672Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-1589 )9/30/2016
GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS - Preferences and Set-Asides. Bid protestor waived right to protest contract awarded in competitive procurement that was not set aside for small business.
the Lanham Act's specific grant of jurisdiction to the district courts trumps the general jurisdictional grant to this court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1491 and )
1498)
[18][19]Moreover, plaintiff's attempt to repackage its Lanham Act claims as bid protest claims is unavailing. Plaintiff requests that this court make anticompetitive findings)
47
American Innotek, Inc. v. United States128 Fed.Cl. 135, 151+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-223C )9/22/2016
PATENTS - Medical Devices and Procedures. Patent for bags for containment and disposal of bodily fluids was invalid as obvious in light of prior art.
of Patents 393 406(1) k. In general; remedy of patent owner.Remedy in patent infringement actions against United States is limited to monetary damages. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
48
Liberty Ammunition, Inc. v. United States835 F.3d 1388, 1391+
119 U.S.P.Q.2d 1830, 1830+
Fed.Cir.
(NO. 2015-5057 , 2015-5061 )
8/26/2016
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Projectiles did not meet ”reduced area of contact” or ”intermediate opposite ends” limitation of firearms projectile patent, barring infringement...
Federal Claims that ammunition rounds used by the United States Army embody the claims of Liberty Ammunition, Inc.'s U.S. Patent No. 7,748,325 without authorization, violating )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
The Government argues that the trial court erred in construing several claim terms and that, when these terms are construed correctly, the)
49
Astornet Technologies, Inc. v. BAE Systems, Inc.
201 F.Supp.3d 721, 724+
D.Md.(NO. 14-CV-0245 )8/4/2016
122. Attorney fees, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Attorney Fees. Government contractor's requested hourly rates were reasonable on attorneys' fees motion as prevailing party in suit for inducing patent infringement.
exclusive remedy for alleged infringement was suit against United States in Court of Federal Claims, and yet he continued to pursue suit in district court. )
28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1498(a))
1927[5]170A Federal Civil Procedure 170AXX Sanctions 170AXX(B) Grounds for Imposition 170A 2767 Unwarranted, Groundless or Frivolous Papers or)
50
Haddad v. United States127 Fed.Cl. 565, 568Fed.Cl.
(NO. 15-1139C , 15-1140C )
7/14/2016
PATENTS - Assignments and Licensing. Assignor of patent related to airport vehicular gate entry access system lacked standing to sue United States for alleged infringement.
of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same, [seeking] recovery of reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
[1][2][3]As a threshold matter, the court must consider jurisdiction before reaching the substantive merits of a case. See)
51
Travel Sentry, Inc. v. Tropp192 F.Supp.3d 332, 333E.D.N.Y.
(NO. 06CV6415ENVRLM , 08CV4446ENVRLM )
6/29/2016
PATENTS - Consumer Goods. Company that created standards for dual-access luggage lock system did not infringe patents describing method of airline luggage screening.
once more. In the first action, Travel Sentry, and in the second, all defendants, have moved for summary judgment on grounds of noninfringement, invalidity, and )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
In both actions, Tropp has filed cross-motions for summary judgment on infringement, which prompted motions to strike certain exhibits. For the)
52
Ross-Hime Designs, Inc. v. United States126 Fed.Cl. 299, 310+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-201C )4/29/2016
PATENTS - Industrial Equipment. Disputed claim terms were construed for patents related to anthropomorphic ”master-slave” robotic manipulators.
inventor: U.S. Patent Nos. 4,821,594 5,692,412 5,845,540 5,967,580 5,979,264 6,105,455, and 6,418,811 Discussion Jurisdiction The Court has subject-matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
, which provides in relevant part:Whenever an invention described in and covered by a patent of the United States is used)
53
Crye Precision LLC v. Duro Textiles, LLC2016 WL 1629343, *3+S.D.N.Y.
(NO. 15CV1681 (DLC) )
4/22/2016
This action arises from a dispute between a licensor of a patented camouflage pattern and a former licensee. The licensee, defendant Duro Textiles, LLC (“Duro”), is a printer that...
pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Duro's motion was premised on the ground that, pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
, Crye's claims directed to Duro's manufacture and sale of Scorpion W2 products for the benefit of the Government could be brought only)
54
Demodulation, Inc. v. United States126 Fed.Cl. 499, 501+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-236C )4/18/2016
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Patentee's failure to identify any accused infringing products was fatal to its patent infringement claims against United States.
holder's failure to identify any accused infringing products being used or manufactured by the government was fatal to its patent infringement claims against United States. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[8]291 Patents 291V Construction and Operation of Patents 291V(A) In General 291 1314 Claims and Limitations; Language of Patent)
55
American Innotek, Inc. v. United States126 Fed.Cl. 468, 473+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-223C )4/12/2016
PATENTS - Consumer Goods. Scope of funnel means could not be narrowed to ”wholly prevent escape” of unsequestered fluid from interior of bag.
Cases, Contexts, and Questions 170B 3906 k. Intellectual property.The Court of Federal Claims has exclusive jurisdiction over patent infringement actions against the federal government. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and)
56
3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United States126 Fed.Cl. 266, 267+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-501C )4/5/2016
92. Persons entitled to maintain action, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Parties. Government sufficiently stated that third-party entities had interest in patent infringement action such that notice to them was appropriate.
claims of patent infringement by licensee and assignee alleging that federal agencies infringed three patents related to security alarm system that incorporated real-time video. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and)
57
CANVS Corporation v. United States126 Fed.Cl. 106, 109+Fed.Cl.(NO. 10-540 C )3/31/2016
PATENTS - Industrial Equipment. Claim term was construed in patent directed toward device optimizing user's ability to see in low-light conditions.
for U.S. Patent No. 6,911,652; single term in dispute OPINION AND ORDER CAMPBELL–SMITH, Chief Judge This is a patent infringement action brought, pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
, by CANVS Corporation (CANVS or plaintiff) against the United States, acting through the Department of the Army (government or defendant).1)
58
Floyd v. United States125 Fed.Cl. 183, 185+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-793C )2/24/2016
43. Use or manufacture, patents
PATENTS - Computers and Electronics. Police department's use of accused device for taking electronic fingerprints to access FBI fingerprint data was not use by United States.
to any United States patent as of the instant the invention is first used or manufactured by or for the government. U.S. Const. Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498)
[11]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and Claims)
59
Vir2us, Inc. v. Invincea, Inc.2016 WL 8711512, *1
2016 Markman 8711512, *8711512
E.D.Va.(NO. 2:15CV162 )2/19/2016
On Monday, February I, 2016, the Court conducted a Markman hearing for the purpose of construing ten (10) disputed terms in the patents at issue. Upon consideration of the parties'...
of Failure to State a Claim, Non-Infringement, Invalidity, Prosecution History Estoppel, Limitation on Damages, No Right to Injunctive Relief, Laches, Equitable Estoppel and Waiver, )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
Answer ¶¶ 34–44.Defendants also alleged counterclaims against Vir2us, asserting that Plaintiff has infringed U.S. Patent No. 8,839,422 (''the '422)
60
Zoltek Corp. v. U.S.815 F.3d 1302, 1304
117 U.S.P.Q.2d 1866, 1866
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2014-5082 )2/19/2016
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Reissue patent for method of producing carbon fiber sheet products was not invalid for obviousness.
ruling in Zoltek I. This court recognized the liability of the United States for infringement by acts that are performed with its authorization and consent. )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
''Whenever an invention described in and covered by a patent of the United States is used or manufactured by or for)
61
Vir2us, Inc. v. Invincea, Inc.2016 WL 453486, *1
2016 Markman 453486, *453486
E.D.Va.(NO. 2:15CV162 )2/5/2016
On Monday, February 1, 2016, the Court conducted a Markman hearing for the purpose of construing ten (10) disputed terms in the patents at issue. Upon consideration of the parties'...
of Failure to State a Claim, Non-Infringement, Invalidity, Prosecution History Estoppel, Limitation on Damages, No Right to Injunctive Relief, Laches, Equitable Estoppel and Waiver, )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
Answer ¶¶ 34-44.Defendants also alleged counterclaims against Vir2us, asserting that Plaintiff has infringed U.S. Patent No. 8,839,422 (''the '422)
62
Mykey Technology Inc. v. Intelligent Computer Solutions, Inc.2016 WL 6662718, *1+C.D.Cal.
(NO. CV 13-2461-AG (PLAX) , MDL 2461 )
2/1/2016
On October 21, 2015, and November 19, 2015, the Court entered orders that required defendant CRU Acquisition Group, LLC (“CRU” or “defendant”) to produce certain documents,...
relevant Court Orders are at issue here: (1) sales information related to the accused products (October Order); (2) transactions supporting defendant's affirmative defense pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
(November Order); and (3) schematics, and technical and functional specifications documents (November Order). As to the first category, plaintiff contends in part)
63
Holmberg v. United States124 Fed.Cl. 610, 612Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-284C )1/12/2016
PATENTS - Design. Term ”scope,” as used in patent for device to be mounted on firearm meant ”viewing instrument,” rather than ”telescope.”
ORDER AND OPINION ON CLAIM CONSTRUCTION DAMICH, Senior Judge This case arises out of Plaintiff Larry Holmberg's allegation that Defendant, the United States, has violated )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
through the use or manufacture of the invention described in United States Patent Nos. 6,988,332 (''the 331 patent'') and 7,100,321 (''the 321)
64
3rd Eye Surveillance, LLC v. United States124 Fed.Cl. 438, 439+Fed.Cl.(NO. 15-501C )12/17/2015
PATENTS - Pleading. Patent infringement complaint against government required more definite statement to provide sufficient notice of infringing activities.
statement; RCFC 8(a)(2), RCFC 12(e)OPINION AND ORDER LETTOW, Judge.Pending before the court in this patent infringement case brought pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
are motions by the defendant (''United States'' or the ''government'') to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and for a)
65
Clark v. U.S.
632 Fed.Appx. 1027, 1028+
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2015-5002 )11/25/2015
GOVERNMENT - United States. Claimant failed to state claim against federal government for infringing copyright in claimant's program for modifying student behavior.
than federal government, in claimant's action for infringement of copyright and patent rights in claimant's program for modifying student behavior. 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1491(a) )
1498(a))
[2]170B Federal Courts 170BXIX Exclusive, Concurrent, and Conflicting Jurisdiction as Between Federal Courts 170BXIX(C) Pendency and Scope of Prior Proceedings; First-Filed)
66
Advanced Aerospace Technologies, Inc. v. United States124 Fed.Cl. 282, 288+Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-85 C )11/24/2015
PATENTS - Transportation. Term, ”outboard portion,” in a patent related to a launch and recovery system for unmanned aerial vehicles was indefinite.
of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same [seeking] recovery of reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The December 11, 2013 Third Amended Complaint properly invoked the court's jurisdiction, pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a)
), authorizing the)
67
Crye Precision LLC v. Duro Textiles, LLC2015 WL 6509143, *3S.D.N.Y.
(NO. 15CV1681 DLC )
10/28/2015
This action arises from a continuing dispute between the licensor and owner of a patented camouflage pattern, plaintiffs Crye Precision LLC (“Crye Precision”) and Lineweight LLC...
facts alleged in Duro's counterclaims and the terms of the Covenant, Duro's declaratory judgment counterclaims are now moot. The Covenant reads as follows:Consistent with )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
, Crye Precision LLC and Lineweight LLC (collectively, ''Crye'') hereby covenant not to sue Duro Textiles, LLC (''Duro'') or its customers for infringement)
68
Kammeyer v. United States Army Corps of Engineers2015 WL 12765463, *3+C.D.Cal.
(NO. EDCV15869JGBKKX )
10/9/2015
Before the Court is Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Claims against Federal Defendants. (“Motion,” Doc. No. 40.) A hearing was held on the Motion on September 28, 2015. Counsel for...
any other statute that grants consent to suit expressly or impliedly forbids the relief which is sought.''5 U.S.C. § 702(2) Federal Defendants argue )
28 U.S.C. Section 1498(b))
is such a statute that would preclude relief under the APA. )
Section 1498(b))
grants consent for the United States to)
69
Sheridan v. U.S.
629 Fed.Appx. 948, 949+
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2015-5073 )10/8/2015
GOVERNMENT - United States. Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over infringement claims under statute governing assistance to other countries for increasing trade.
absence of any claim that the private infringers had authorization from or otherwise were acting for the federal government. 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1491(a)(1) )
1498)
291 Patents 291X Patents Enumerated 291 2091 k. In general; utility.US Patent 7,415,982. Cited.Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in)
70
Astornet Technologies Inc. v. BAE Systems, Inc.802 F.3d 1271, 1271+
116 U.S.P.Q.2d 1523, 1523+
Fed.Cir.(Md.)
(NO. 2014-1854 , 2015-1006 , 2015-1007 )
9/17/2015
59. ---- Direct, infringement, patents
GOVERNMENT - United States. Patent licensee's exclusive remedy for alleged infringement by government contractors was suit against United States in Court of Federal Claims.
indirect infringement was use of patented invention by TSA, and although licensee referenced additional theory of direct infringement, that theory was not asserted in complaint. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498)
[3]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and Claims)
71
L-3 Communications Corporation v. Jaxon Engineering & Maintenance, Inc.
125 F.Supp.3d 1155, 1176
2015 IER Cases 190,482, 190482
D.Colo.
(NO. 10-CV-02868-MSK-KMT )
9/1/2015
PATENTS - Estoppel. Employer, a government contractor, lost its exclusive right to practice its patent when government exercised its right to appropriate title to patent.
3 lost its exclusive right to practice the Patent when the Government exercised its right to appropriate title the Patent; and (ii) that pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
, L-3 must bring suit against the U.S. Government, not the Defendants, for infringement of the Patent.FN12. L-3 has)
72
Athey v. United States123 Fed.Cl. 42, 61+
2015 Wage & Hour Cas.2d (BNA) 282,178, 282178+
Fed.Cl.
(NO. 06-872C , 99-2051C )
8/31/2015
LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT - Public Employment. Former federal civilian employees were not entitled to prejudgment interest on claims for miscalculation of lump-sum payments for annual...
No. 194, Athey (quoting Gaylord v. United States, 678 F.3d 1339, 1345 (Fed.Cir.2012)Gaylord awarded interest in a copyright infringement action based on )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
, which waives the United States' sovereign immunity for copyright infringement including ''reasonable and entire compensation as damages for such infringement.''678)
73
Crye Precision LLC v. Bennettsville Printing
124 F.Supp.3d 231, 231+
E.D.N.Y.
(NO. 15-CV-00221 FB RER )
8/27/2015
62. ---- License, infringement, patents
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
100. Sovereign immunity, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Design. Licensor's breach of contract claim against licensee of camouflage pattern was not precluded by patent infringement statute.
unlicensed or unlawful use or manufacture of a patented invention on behalf of the government, and (2) it provides an affirmative defense for government contractors. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and)
74
Kammeyer v. Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises2015 WL 5031959, *4+C.D.Cal.
(NO. EDCV15869JGBKKX )
8/24/2015
On June 15, 2015, the Court granted a Temporary Restraining Order which enjoined Defendant United States Army Corps of Engineers (“USACE”) from altering or destroying the...
any other statute that grants consent to suit expressly or impliedly forbids the relief which is sought.''5 U.S.C. § 702(2) USACE argues that )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
forbids the relief Plaintiffs seek. )
Section 1498(b))
is another Congressional waiver of sovereign immunity. The statute grants consent for the)
75
Cormack v. United States122 Fed.Cl. 691, 692+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-232C )8/18/2015
58. Infringement, patents--Generally
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
104. Burden of proof, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Processes. Mail sorting service used by Postal Service did not literally infringe on patent's method or system for sorting mailpieces in single pass.
use or manufacture of an invention by or for United States is analogous to a taking of property under the Fifth Amendment. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]291 Patents 291VI Patent Rights and Duties 291VI(F) Government Rights and Duties as to Inventions 291 1532 Inventions by)
76
Advanced Aerospace Technologies, Inc. v. United States122 Fed.Cl. 445, 453+Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-85 C )7/29/2015
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Term ”sensor” in patent related to launch and recovery system for unmanned aerial aircraft was not limited to cover corresponding structure.
of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same, [seeking] recovery of reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The December 11, 2013 Third Amended Complaint properly invokes the court's jurisdiction, pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a)
), authorizing the)
77
Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United States122 Fed.Cl. 245, 248+Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-513C )7/20/2015
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Patent related to motion-tracking relative to moving platform was invalid for failure to claim eligible subject matter.
Thales Defense & Security, Inc. TVI designs and develops helmet-mounted display and motion-tracking technology for defense and aerospace applications. TVI brings this action under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
alleging the unlicensed and unlawful use by the United States of TVI's U.S. Patent No. 6,474,159 (''the '159 patent'') The technology involved)
78
FastShip LLC v. United States122 Fed.Cl. 71, 71+Fed.Cl.(NO. 12-484C )6/26/2015
43. Use or manufacture, patents
PATENTS - Transportation. Navy's allegedly infringing ship was not manufactured by or for government before expiration of patents-in-suit.
to any United States patent as of the instant the invention is first used or manufactured by or for the government. U.S. Const. Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]291 Patents 291VII Patent Infringement 291VII(A) In General 291 1552 k. Nature and elements of injury.393 United States)
79
Crye Precision LLC v. Duro Textiles, LLC112 F.Supp.3d 69, 69+S.D.N.Y.
(NO. 15CV1681 DLC )
6/16/2015
49. ---- Miscellaneous cases, authorization or consent, patents
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
PATENTS - Assignments and Licensing. Patent licensor's breach of contract claim against former licensee was not barred by statute waiving government's sovereign immunity.
patented pattern through color palette, pattern or arrangement, or placement of any elements incorporated in pattern, rather than injunctive relief based on infringement of patent. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[2]291 Patents 291VI Patent Rights and Duties 291VI(D) Licenses and Royalties 291 1495 Rights, Remedies, and Liabilities of Licensees)
80
Clark v. United States2015 WL 3649675, *2+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-490C )6/12/2015
Plaintiff James Hedman Clark, the author of a work entitled ''High School Shut Down Room Program,'' has brought this lawsuit pro se alleging that the United States infringed his...
of Congress, but also a few government contractors and telecommunications service providers.Compl. ¶¶ 12–19. Mister Clark asserts four counts of copyright infringement under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
Compl. ¶¶ 90–148; one count of Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) violations, 17 U.S.C. § 1701 et. seq., Compl. ¶¶)
81
AAR Manufacturing, Inc. v. United States121 Fed.Cl. 553, 557+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-575C )6/4/2015
PATENTS - Transportation. Term ”hollow” in patent for collapsible containerized shelter meant ”having a hole, cavity, or empty space within sufficient to serve as shelter.”
of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same [seeking] recovery of reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.'' )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The August 13, 2013 Complaint properly invokes the court's jurisdiction, under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a)
), authorizing the United States Court)
82
Clark v. United States2015 WL 3492093, *1Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-10C )5/29/2015
On May 1, 2015, the Clerk's office received a submission from Mr. Clark which it did not file because the document was neither properly bound per Rule 5.5(c)(5) of the Rules of the...
to the absence of an issued patent.See Clark v. United States, No. 11–10C, 2014 WL 3728172, at *6 (Fed.Cl. July 28, 2014) (citing )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The motion for relief is, accordingly, denied under RCFC 62.1(a)(2)IT IS SO ORDERED.110 0 #2 2059)
83
Bondyopadhyay v. United States2015 WL 1311726, *2+Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-147C )3/20/2015
This patent infringement case comes before the Court on Defendant's partial motion to dismiss for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction and failure to state a claim upon which relief...
contracts. Mot. to Dismiss, Chiang Decl., Ex. 2.Plaintiff alleges that''[t]his Claim has three parts. The first or the main part arises out of )
Title 28 U.S.Code, Section 1498(a))
The second part arises out of Title 35 U.S.Code Section 284 under special circumstances described below. The third part covers)
84
Norton v. United States2015 WL 1086548, *6+Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-633C )3/9/2015
Pro se plaintiff, Michael Anthony Norton, filed a complaint in the United States Court of Federal Claims, ''set[ting] forth a demand for judgment against the United States in the...
F 3d 1339, 1343 (Fed.Cir.)reh'g and reh'g en banc denied (Fed.Cir. 2002).cert. denied,538 U.S. 906 (2003)Copyright Infringement Claims Section (b) of )
28 U.S.C. § 1498)
provides in part,whenever the copyright in any work protected under the copyright laws of the United States shall be infringed by)
85
Sheridan v. United States120 Fed.Cl. 127, 130+Fed.Cl.(NO. 14-696C )2/20/2015
GOVERNMENT - Jurisdiction. Court of Federal Claims lacked jurisdiction over patentee's claims against government, seeking compensation for infringement by private parties.
and owner did not allege any facts to suggest that government authorized or consented to infringement by private parties. 28 U.S.C.A. §§ 1491(a)(1) )
1498(a))
[9]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and Claims 393 406)
86
Micro/sys, Inc. v. DRS Technologies, Inc.2015 WL 12748630, *2+C.D.Cal.
(NO. CV143441DMGAJWX )
2/13/2015
On July 23, 2014, plaintiff Micro/sys, Inc. (“Micro/sys”) filed its First Amended Complaint (“FAC”) against defendants the United States Postal Service (“USPS”); DRS Sustainment...
and patent claims against the government must be brought before the Court of Federal Claims, which has exclusive jurisdiction over such claims. Id.see also )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
''the exclusive action which may be brought for such [copyright] infringement shall be an action by the copyright owner against the)
87
Gaylord v. U.S.777 F.3d 1363, 1366+
2015 Copr.L.Dec. P 30,721, 30721+ 113 U.S.P.Q.2d 1606, 1606+
Fed.Cir.(NO. 2014-5020 )2/4/2015
COPYRIGHTS - Damages. Per-unit royalty, rather than one-time lump-sum payment, would have been outcome of hypothetical negotiation.
In Gaylord II, we vacated the Court of Federal Claims' decision awarding Mr. Gaylord $5,000 as the ''reasonable and entire compensation'' he was due under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
678 F.3d at 1345 We remanded to determine the fair market value of a license for Mr. Gaylord's work based)
88
Open Text S.A. v. Box, Inc.2015 WL 428345, *1+N.D.Cal.
(NO. 13-CV-04910-JD )
1/30/2015
Plaintiff Open Text has moved for summary judgment on two affirmative defenses asserted by defendants Box and Carahsoft (hereafter referred to collectively as ''Box,'' except where...
two affirmative defenses asserted by defendants Box and Carahsoft (hereafter referred to collectively as ''Box,'' except where otherwise stated): (1) a government contractor defense under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
; and (2) failure to state a claim. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants the motion in part and denies)
89
Liberty Ammunition, Inc. v. United States119 Fed.Cl. 368, 368+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-84C )12/19/2014
111. ---- Reasonable royalty rate, damages, practice and procedure
113. ---- Delay compensation, damages, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Government literally infringed claims of patent for firearms projectile.
authorized to take a non-exclusive and compulsory license to any United States patent based on the theory of eminent domain. U.S. Const. Amend. 5 )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498)
[2]291 Patents 291VI Patent Rights and Duties 291VI(F) Government Rights and Duties as to Inventions 291 1532 Inventions by Government)
90
Micro/sys, Inc. v. DRS Technologies, Inc.2014 WL 12591918, *2+C.D.Cal.
(NO. CV 14-3441-DMG (CWX) )
11/21/2014
On August 13, 2014, defendant Commtech Inc. (“Commtech”) filed a motion to dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint for lack of jurisdiction. [Doc. # 62.] On September 23, 2014, the...
Matter Jurisdiction over Micro/sys's Copyright Claim Commtech seeks dismissal of Micro/sys's copyright claim (Count 1) for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(b))
(Mot. at 17–18). )
Section 1498(b))
states in pertinent part:[W]henever the copyright in any work protected under the copyright)
91
Cormack v. United States119 Fed.Cl. 63, 65+Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-232C )11/4/2014
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Term ”command” in patent disclosing a method and system for sorting mail meant an instruction.
and 19 of U.S. Patent No. 7,781,693 (''the ′693 patent''), entitled ''Method and System for Sorting Incoming Mail,'' and is therefore liable for damages under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
Compl. at 2; Pl.'s Opening Claim Construction Br. (''Pl.'s Br.'') at i., ECF No. 66.1 This opinion addresses claim construction)
92
IRIS Corp. v. Japan Airlines Corp.769 F.3d 1359, 1360+
112 U.S.P.Q.2d 1689, 1689+
Fed.Cir.(N.Y.)(NO. 2010-1051 )10/21/2014
6. Exclusive nature of section
PATENTS - Computers and Electronics. Patentee's exclusive remedy for any infringement was an action against the United States in the Court of Federal Claims.
sufficiency of waiver or consent.(Formerly 393k97 The government's authorization or consent, for purposes of liability for patent infringement, may be either express or implied. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[3]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General 393 403 Particular Liabilities and)
93
SynQor, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.2014 WL 12641603, *7+E.D.Tex.
(NO. 2:14-CV-286-MHS-CMC )
9/29/2014
The above-referenced case was referred to the undersigned United States Magistrate Judge for pre-trial purposes in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636. Before the Court is SynQor,...
Appeals considered whether importing a product using a patented process under § 271(g) rendered the government subject to a suit for patent infringement under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
The court noted the purpose in adopting § 271(g) was to ''harmonize United States law with that of the rest)
94
CANVS Corporation v. United States118 Fed.Cl. 587, 589Fed.Cl.(NO. 10-540C )9/26/2014
PATENTS - Reexamination. Requested stay pending inter partes review by Patent and Trademark Office Patent and Trial Appeal Board (PTAB) was premature and unduly prejudicial.
granting stay pending inter partes review).I. Statement of Facts In August 2010, plaintiff CANVS Corporation (CANVS) filed suit seeking reasonable and entire compensation under )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a))
for defendant's alleged infringement of plaintiff's U.S. Patent No. 6,911,652 filed June 28, 2005 (the patent), disclosing a low light imaging)
95
L-3 Communications Corporation v. Jaxon Engineering & Maintenance, Inc.
69 F.Supp.3d 1136, 1139+
D.Colo.
(NO. 10-CV-02868-MSK-KMT )
9/22/2014
PATENTS - Computers and Electronics. Competitor founded by former employees of assignee of patents was estopped from asserting invalidity as defense to assignee's infringement...
affirmative counterclaim for declaratory relief sounding in statutory immunity from a patent infringement claim, while simultaneously asserting an affirmative defense on precisely the same grounds. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[15]118A Declaratory Judgment 118AI Nature and Grounds in General 118AI(C) Other Remedies 118A 41 k. Existence and effect in)
96
Demodulation, Inc. v. United States118 Fed.Cl. 69, 72+
112 U.S.P.Q.2d 1677, 1677+
Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-236C )8/29/2014
52. Government contracts, patents--Generally
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
PATENTS - Science and Technology. Contractor was mere licensee, and not equitable owner of patent related to metal filament, precluding its ability to sue government for...
amorphous metal filament, since claimed invention passed into public domain, and any of contractor's rights flowing from those patents ceased, upon termination of patents' terms. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[14]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(H) Court of Federal Claims (Formerly Claims Court)
97
Ensign-Bickford Aerospace & Defense Company v. United States118 Fed.Cl. 363, 365+
112 U.S.P.Q.2d 1988, 1988+
Fed.Cl.(NO. 13-57C )8/13/2014
43. Use or manufacture, patents
65. ---- Miscellaneous cases, infringement, patents
95. Parties, practice and procedure
GOVERNMENT - United States. patentee's infringement counterclaims against government subcontractor were not pending when patentee brought later action against federal government.‐
or manufactured infringing products with government's authorization or consent, and subcontractor here allegedly supplied infringing products to government while acting as subcontractor on government contract. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
[5]170B Federal Courts 170BXIX Exclusive, Concurrent, and Conflicting Jurisdiction as Between Federal Courts 170BXIX(C) Pendency and Scope of Prior)
98
Lamson v. United States117 Fed.Cl. 755, 756+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-377C )7/31/2014
43. Use or manufacture, patents
100. Sovereign immunity, practice and procedure
102a. Defenses available, practice and procedure
PATENTS - Medical Devices and Procedures. Government was protected by medical immunity defense from patent infringement claim.‐
393 406(2) k. Liability of government.(Formerly 393k97 Medical immunity defense is available to the United States in actions for infringement of a patent. )
28 U.S.C.A. § 1498(a))
35 U.S.C.A. § 287(c)[2]393 United States 393II Liabilities of and Claims Against United States 393II(A) In General)
99
Clark v. United States2014 WL 3728172, *4+Fed.Cl.(NO. 11-10C )7/28/2014
Pending before the Court is defendant's motion to dismiss plaintiff's amended complaint. For the reasons discussed below, the motion is GRANTED. Plaintiff, James Hedman Clark,...
relief can be granted.Our court does not have jurisdiction over claims against defendants other than the United States.See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1491(a) )
1498(a))
United States v. Sherwood, 312 U.S. 584, 588 (1941) (holding that jurisdiction of our court's predecessor was limited to ''money judgments in suits brought)
100
Spa Syspatronic AG v. United States117 Fed.Cl. 375, 378Fed.Cl.(NO. 10-769C )7/18/2014
PATENTS - Computers and Electronics. Lack of algorithm for means-plus-function limitations rendered two patent claims invalid as definite.‐
third-party defendant.Patents; Means-plus-function limitations; 35 U.S.C. § 112; Indefiniteness.OPINION BRUGGINK JUDGE This is a patent infringement action brought pursuant to )
28 U.S.C. § 1498(a) (2012)
) against the United States for unlicensed use of plaintiff's patent. A third party, Gemalto, Inc., responded to our rule 14)
Loading...
 
 
 
All cases citing 28 USC §1498
 
 
Main menu