CAFC News Brief

Applications in Internet Time, LLC v. Salesforce, Inc., decided 10 Oct 24

In this patent infringement lawsuit, the court reviewed the district court's grant of summary judgment to Salesforce, focusing on claim construction of "automatically detecting" and determinations of non-infringement, invalidity due to anticipation and obviousness, and exceptional case status. The CAFC modified the claim construction, vacated the summary judgments, reversed the exceptional case finding, and remanded the case for further proceedings, awarding costs to Applications in Internet Time, LLC. The core dispute centered on whether the claimed invention required "intelligent agents" and whether the prior art anticipated the claimed invention.

AlexSam, Inc. v. Aetna, Inc., decided 08 Oct 24

AlexSam appealed the dismissal of its patent infringement lawsuit against Aetna. The case centered on whether Aetna's use of Mastercard and Visa-branded products infringed AlexSam's "Multifunction Card System" patent. The Federal Circuit vacated and remanded the lower court's dismissal, finding errors in its analysis of a license agreement between AlexSam and Mastercard and in its assessment of whether Aetna's actions constituted direct infringement. The court determined the lower court incorrectly interpreted the scope of the license agreement and improperly dismissed claims regarding Aetna's use of Visa products. The appellate court held that the lower court should have taken all of AlexSam's factual allegations as true when considering the motion to dismiss and remanded the case back to the district court.

Toyo Tire Corp. v. Atturo Tire Corporation, decided 04 Oct 24

This case is about a trade dress infringement lawsuit between Toyo Tire and Atturo Tire. Toyo sued Atturo for copying its tire tread design, but the district court sanctioned Toyo for discovery misconduct, excluding expert testimony and granting summary judgment for Atturo due to Toyo's failure to properly define its trade dress. Atturo's counterclaims, alleging tortious interference and other issues stemming from Toyo's actions in an International Trade Commission settlement, proceeded to trial, resulting in a large damage award for Atturo. The appellate court affirmed some sanctions, but reversed the judgment on Atturo's counterclaims, finding them barred by Illinois' absolute litigation privilege, ultimately dismissing the majority of Atturo's claims.

Crocs, Inc. v. Effervescent, Inc., et al., decided 03 Oct 24

This is an appeal from a district court’s summary judgment in favor of Crocs, Inc. in a patent infringement lawsuit where Dawgs, Inc. counterclaimed for false advertising under the Lanham Act. The district court, citing precedent, ruled that Dawgs’ claim of false advertising regarding Crocs’ misrepresentation of its Croslite material as patented was not actionable. The appeals court reversed this decision, holding that falsely claiming that a product feature is patented, and advertising this claim in a way that misleads consumers about the product's qualities, is actionable under Section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act. The case is remanded for further proceedings.