Category Archives: Trade Secret

Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solutions, Inc. v. Intersil Corporation et al.

Docket No. 2017-2388 DYK, O’MALLEY, HUGHES July 6, 2018 Brief summary: DC decision regarding trade secret misappropriation and damages, and patent infringement, affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part, and remanded. Summary: This opinion is a modified opinion of that originally-issued on May 1, 2018. … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, Infringement, Injunction, Trade Secret | Leave a comment

Texas Advanced Optoelectronic Solns., Inc. v. Intersil Corp. et al.

Docket No. 2016-2121, -2208, -2235 DYK, BRYSON, TARANTO May 1, 2018 Brief summary: DC decision relating to trade secret misappropriation affirmed- and vacated-in-part (e.g., “Intersil did not misappropriate information that it already had” but did not show alleged trade secret … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, Infringement, Trade Secret, Willfullness | Leave a comment

CardiAQ Valve Technologies, Inc. v. Neovasc Inc. et al.

Docket Nos. 2017-1302, -1513 NEWMAN, O’MALLEY, TARANTO September 1, 2017 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC decision finding that CardiAQ’a employees should have been named inventors on Neovasc’s patents and trade secret misappropriation. Summary: Neovasc appealed DC on finding that CardiAQ’a employees … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, Inventorship, Lost Profits, Trade Secret | Leave a comment

TNS Media Research, LLC et al. (“Kantar”) v. Tivo Research and Analytics, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2014-1668 NEWMAN, CLEVENGER, O’MALLEY September 16, 2015 Non-precedential Brief Summary: DC grant of SJ affirmed on some grounds (infringement under DOE) but reversed on others (trade secrets). Summary: Tivo appealed DC grant of SJ of noninfringement and no … Continue reading

Posted in Damages, Doctrine of equivalents, Infringement, Trade Secret | Leave a comment

ClearValue, Inc. et al. v. Pearl River Polymers, Inc.

Docket No. 2011-1078, -1100 PROST, SCHALL, MOORE February 17, 2012 Brief summary: Teaching away is relevant to an obviousness analysis but not anticipation. A broad range (genus) can anticipate a limited range (species) if one cannot show anything special (“critical”) … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Trade Secret | Leave a comment

Atlantic Research Marketing Systems, Inc. v. Stephen P. Troy, Jr. and Troy Industries, Inc.

Docket No. 2011-1002, -1003 PROST, MAYER, O’MALLEY October 6, 2011 Brief summary: Atlantic unsuccessfully argued that its patent described the alleged infringing device, but successfully argued in the alternative that the design was its trade secret. Summary: Atlantic appealed the … Continue reading

Posted in Trade Secret, Written description | Leave a comment

TianRui Group Company Ltd. et al. v. ITC, et al.

Docket No. 2010-1395 BRYSON, SCHALL, MOORE October 11, 2011 Subject matter: trade secret, ITC jurisdiction Brief summary: ITC may investigate foreign activities to prove an element of a misappropriation claim under 19 U.S.C. § 1337. TianRui appealed ITC determination that … Continue reading

Posted in International Trade Commission, Trade Secret | Tagged | Leave a comment