Rosebud v. Adobe was decided on February 9, 2016 on appeal from the District of Delaware. The suit revolved around the ‘280 patent, a continuation of the ‘699 patent, which itself is a continuation of the ‘760 patent (the grandparent patent). There, the district court granted defendant-Adobe’s motion for summary judgment that …
Monsanto v. Bowman was decided on September 21, 2011 on appeal from the Southern District of Indiana. The case involved many issues but this post will only focus on actual notice under § 287(a). “Since 1996, Monsanto has marketed and sold .. soybean seeds under its own brands, and licenses its technology to seed …
Gart v. Logitech was decided on August 21, 2001 on appeal from the Central District of California. The case involved many issues but this post will only focus on actual notice under § 287(a). In 1989, prior to the issuance of the patent-in-suit, plaintiff Gart approached defendant Logitech to discuss licensing the …
SRI International v. Advanced Technology Laboratories was decided on October 23, 1997 on appeal from the Northern District of California. The case involved many issues but this post will only focus on actual notice under § 287(a). In May 1986, plaintiff SRI sent a letter to defendant Advanced Technology Laboratories (ATL) offering a non-exclusive license. …
Amsted v. Buckeye Steel Castings was decided on April 18, 1994 on appeal from the Northern District of Illinois. The case involved many issues but this post will only focus on actual notice under § 287(a). Plaintiff Amsted brought suit against defendant Buckeye on February 25, 1991. In 1986, Amsted sent Buckeye and other …