The Delhi High Court analysed the validity of eight Ericsson patents under Section 3(k), following Lava’s challenge. Except for the first patent, the Court upheld the remaining patents, finding them to involve technical advancements beyond mere algorithms or mathematical methods.
Read more about A Deep Dive into Section 3(k) Analysis of Ericsson’s Eight Patents – Ericsson vs. Lava – Part VIITag: Patent Invalidation
Patent Invalidation in the US: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
The post examines how patent invalidation influences innovation in the US, particularly within the technology industry. It discusses the challenges faced by start-ups and advocates for policy reforms to benefit technological progress.
Read more about Patent Invalidation in the US: The Good, the Bad and the UglyMitigating Patent Risks
This post examines key strategies for mitigating patent risks in India, focusing on design around, licensing, and invalidation. It provides legal analysis and practical examples for businesses facing patent enforcement challenges.
Read more about Mitigating Patent RisksRosaire v. Baroid Sales, 218 F.2d 72 (1955)
Rosaire v. Baroid Sales examines whether prior public experiments can invalidate a patent under Section 102(a). The judgment clarifies that successful, public use of a method by others before the patent application constitutes prior knowledge, resulting in patent invalidation.
Read more about Rosaire v. Baroid Sales, 218 F.2d 72 (1955)True Position Inc.’s Device Locator Patent Invalidated
The USPTO’s PTAB has invalidated True Position Inc.’s device locator patent 7,783,299 on grounds of anticipation and obviousness based on prior art. Polaris Wireless successfully challenged the patent’s validity, highlighting the significance of robust prior art analysis in US patent law.
Read more about True Position Inc.’s Device Locator Patent Invalidated