Patterson Belknap
Microsoft has discontinued support for Internet Explorer. To access the Patterson Belknap website, please install a modern browser like Microsoft Edge or Google Chrome.
We use cookies to enhance your experience of our website and provide us with information on how you use our website. For more information about the way our site uses cookies, please read our Privacy Policy. Click "Accept Cookies" to enable cookies and third-party content or “Decline” to decline the use of cookies.
Accept CookiesDecline
mobile logo
High Contrast Mode
  • Search
  • People
  • Practices
  • Values
    Inclusion and Engagement
    Pro Bono
    Core Values
  • Firm
    About Our Firm
    Careers : Attorneys
    Careers: Business Services
    Contact Us
    Blogs & Podcasts
    Firm News
    Publications
    Events
Skip Nav
Patterson Belknap Logo
Inclusion and Engagement
Pro Bono
Core Values
About Our Firm
Careers
AttorneysBusiness Services
Contact Us
News & Resources
Blogs & PodcastsFirm NewsPublicationsEvents

Find a Person


Search
  • A
    B
    C
    D
    E
    F
    G
    H
    I
    J
    K
    L
    M
  • N
    O
    P
    Q
    R
    S
    T
    U
    V
    W
    X
    Y
    Z
  • View All
  • A
    B
    C
    D
    E
    F
    G
    H
    I
    J
    K
    L
    M
    N
    O
    P
    Q
    R
    S
    T
    U
    V
    W
    X
    Y
    Z
    View All

Find a Practice

Search
  • Corporate & Transactions
  • Exempt Organizations & Private Clients
  • Litigation, Disputes & Investigations
  • All Practices
printable-logo

NY Patent Decisions Blog

Categories / Search
Categories / Search

Search Blog

Search
Filter By Categories:
  • Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)
  • Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)
Posts
Subscribe
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Rest Assured: Pillow Design Patent Survives Inventorship and Invalidity Challenges

On June 7, 2026, District Judge Brian Cogan (E.D.N.Y.) granted Plaintiff Hit Notion LLC’s (Hit Notion’s) summary judgment motion on patent inventorship, on-sale bar, and obviousness, denying a summary judgment motion by Defendant Digitalprints USA Corporation d/b/a Cheer Collection (Cheer Collection) for...
June 16, 2026
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

It’s All Relative: Judge Komitee Holds That an Infringing Sale Can Take Place at Multiple Times Both Before and After a Patent Issues

Judge Eric Komitee recently denied a motion to dismiss patent infringement claims accusing flood prevention products sold pursuant to a contract that was entered into before the patent issued but delivered and installed after issuance.   In 2013, plaintiff FloodBreak, LLC...
April 21, 2026
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

All Activity Rings [Patents] Closed—Judge Rochon Grants Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement on Seven Design Patents

Judge Jennifer L. Rochon (S.D.N.Y.) recently granted Defendant Apple, Inc.’s (“Apple”) motions for summary judgment of non-infringement of seven design patents. Plaintiff Michael Shunock (“Shunock”) asserted U.S. Patent Nos.: D956,802; D956,803; D956,804; D956,805; D956,806; D956,807; and D956,808 (together, the “Asserted...
April 21, 2026
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

“Not an Arm of New Jersey”: Judge Gardephe Denies Motion for Summary Judgment Based on Eleventh Amendment Immunity

On March 30, 2026, United States District Judge Paul G. Gardephe (S.D.N.Y) denied Defendant New Jersey Transit Corporation’s (“NJ Transit”) motion for summary judgment on all of Plaintiff Bytemark, Inc.’s (“Bytemark”) claims.  Bytemark, Inc. v. Xerox Corp., et al, No. 17-cv-1803...
April 2, 2026
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Please Leave a Message: Judge Hellerstein Finds Claims Directed to Missed-Call Categorization to Be Abstract

Recently, District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.) granted Defendant CloudTalk.io, Inc.’s (“CloudTalk”) motion to dismiss Missed Call, LLC’s (“Missed Call”) complaint, finding that the asserted patent was directed to an abstract idea and lacked an inventive concept. Missed Call, LLC...
March 25, 2026
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Just Because it Wasn’t Timely Raised, Doesn’t Mean the Prosecution History Wasn’t Available: Judge Liman Denies Motion for Reconsideration of Claim Construction Order

On February 11, 2026, District Judge Lewis J. Liman (S.D.N.Y.) denied a motion for reconsideration of portions of the Court’s claim construction order defining terms in accordance with their plain and ordinary meaning, filed by Defendants Qingdao Network Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a...
February 19, 2026
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Not So Fast: Judge Hellerstein Seeks More Evidence Before Finding Inequitable Conduct

Recently, United States District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein accepted in part the report and recommendation of Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo. A detailed summary of Judge Figueredo’s decision was the subject of a prior post, available here. As a threshold matter,...
February 11, 2026
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

When One Door Closes, Another Doesn’t Always Open: Judge Bulsara Grants Motion to Dismiss DigitalDoors’s Complaint with Prejudice

On January 16, 2026, District Judge Sanket J. Bulsara (E.D.N.Y.) granted Defendant Flushing Bank’s motion to dismiss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), finding that Plaintiff DigitalDoors, Inc. (“DigitalDoors”) failed to identify an infringing product or service. DigitalDoors, Inc. v....
February 3, 2026
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

The Case Must Go On: Judge Choudhury Denies Stay Pending PTO Ex Parte Reexaminations

Last week, Judge Nusrat J. Choudhury (E.D.N.Y.) denied a motion to stay a patent case pending completion of ex parte reexamination (“EPR”) proceedings challenging the validity of some but not all of the patents-in-suit. See Fleet Connect Sols. LLC v....
February 2, 2026
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Order of Destruction: Judge Chen Reiterates that Defendant Must Destroy Goods Existing Before the Patents Expired

Judge Pamela K. Chen (E.D.N.Y.) recently ordered Defendants Digital Pavilion Electronics LLC, East Brooklyn Labs LLC, and Firemall LLC to destroy infringing products after the expiration of the asserted patents.  The Court had previously issued a “Permanent Injunction Order against...
December 23, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

This Wallet Case Has Yet to Fold: Judge Komitee Denies Motion to Dismiss Patent Infringement Claims

On December 9, 2025, District Judge Eric Komitee (E.D.N.Y.) denied Defendant Bemmo, Inc.’s (Bemmo) motion to dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), finding Plaintiff The Ridge Wallet, LLC (Ridge Wallet) pled sufficient facts for direct and indirect patent infringement.  Ridge...
December 15, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Naughty or Nice? Judge Figueredo Finds Inequitable Conduct in Revival Petition

On November 21, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo recommended that the Court conclude that Plaintiff Sholem Weisner’s conduct in “reviving the ’165 patent constituted inequitable conduct” because, inter alia, Weisner was not incapacitated by illicit drug use during...
December 8, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

“Hole E Evidence, Batman”: Judge Liman Denies Contempt Motion Based on Lack of Competent and Direct Evidence

On November 18, 2025, District Judge Lewis J. Liman (S.D.N.Y.) denied Plaintiff Lashify, Inc.’s (“Lashify”) motion to hold Defendants Qingdao Network Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a UCoolMe (“Qingdao”) and Vivicute Limited in contempt. Lashify, Inc. v. Qingdao Network Tech. Co., Ltd., No. 25-cv-4183 (S.D.N.Y....
November 24, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

No Two Ways About Fees: Judge Oetken Grants Attorneys’ Fees Under Patent Act But Not Section 1927

In a recent patent infringement case, Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) awarded attorneys’ fees under the Patent Act because the case was “exceptional,” but denied fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and the court’s inherent authority based on a lack...
October 29, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Quite the Mouthful: Judge Chen Finds that Claims Directed to Dental Imaging Are Not Abstract

Recently, District Judge Pamela K. Chen (E.D.N.Y.) denied Defendants Dentsply Sirona Inc., Sirona Dental Systems, LLC, and Sirona Dental, Inc.’s (collectively, “Dentsply”) motion to dismiss, finding that Plaintiff Osseo Imaging, LLC’s (“Osseo”) asserted patents relating to dental imaging systems were...
October 9, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Bound by the Agreement: Magistrate Judge Scanlon Recommends Case Dispositive Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings Be Granted

Magistrate Judge Vera M. Scanlon (E.D.N.Y.) recently recommended that, inter alia, Defendant Mastercard’s motion for judgment on the pleadings based on Plaintiff’s failure to abide by an agreement be granted. Alexsam, Inc. v. Mastercard Int’l Inc., No. 15 Civ. 2799...
September 18, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

What You Say May Be Held Against You: Judge Chen Finds Case Exceptional Based on “Borderline Frivolous” Arguments and Counsel’s Conduct

On August 29, 2025, United States District Judge Pamela K. Chen (E.D.N.Y.) granted Plaintiff Tools Aviation, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”) motion for reasonable attorney’s fees, finding the case “exceptional” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 285. In doing so, the Court did not...
September 16, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Judge Román “Illuminates” Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Improper Venue in Light Bulb Camera Case

Judge Nelson S. Román (S.D.N.Y.) recently granted a motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue in a patent case.  Wang v. Laview Eagle Eye Tech. Inc., No. 24-cv-01822-NSR, 2025 WL 2371222, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Aug. 14,...
September 2, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

It’s Not Over Till It’s Over: Judge McMahon Issues Final Judgment in Favor of Geigtech After Two Bench Trials and Two Jury Verdicts

On August 14, 2025, Judge McMahon (S.D.N.Y.) issued a Final Judgment in favor of plaintiff Geigtech East Bay LLC (“Geigtech”) in the total amount of $5,951,153.15. See Geigtech E. Bay LLC v. Lutron Elecs. Co, Case No. 18-Civ-05290 (CM) (August...
August 18, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

You Don’t Get a Second Bite at the Apple: Judge Liman Denies Motion for Modification of a Preliminary Injunction

On August 8, 2025, District Judge Lewis J. Liman (S.D.N.Y.) denied Defendants Qingdao Network Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a UCoolMe and Vivicute Limited’s (together “Qingdao”) motion to modify a preliminary injunction holding that Qingdao was improperly seeking a “redo.” Lashify, Inc....
August 12, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Out With the Old, in With the New: Judge Ramos Grants Leave to Assert New Patents After the Original Patents-in-Suit Were Found Invalid

On July 29, 2025, Judge Edgardo Ramos (S.D.N.Y.) granted plaintiff Kannuu Pty, Ltd. (“Kannuu”) leave to amend its complaint to allege infringement of two newly-issued patents, after the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) invalidated the five patents Kannuu originally...
August 5, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Nothing to See Here: Judge Engelmayer Finds Claims Directed to Interactive Mobile Advertising to be Abstract

On July 21, 2025, District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer (S.D.N.Y.) granted Defendants Teads, Inc., Teads SA, and Teads SARL’s (together, “Teads”) Motion to Dismiss Yieldmo, Inc.’s (“Yieldmo”) Amended Complaint alleging that Teads infringed four of its patents. The patents at...
July 30, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

If at First You Don’t Succeed, Do Not Try Again: Judge Oetken Invokes Collateral Estoppel to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Infringement Claims

On July 9, 2025, Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y) found that collateral estoppel barred plaintiff Linfo IP, LLC from relitigating the validity of its asserted patent and dismissed Linfo’s infringement claims against Aero Global, LLC with prejudice. In January 2025,...
July 15, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Judge Furman Denies TRO in Photo Booth Patent Case Where Plaintiff Delayed and Failed to “Focus” on Irreparable Harm and Likelihood of Success

Judge Jesse M. Furman (S.D.N.Y.) recently denied Plaintiff Chengdu Tops Technology Co., Ltd.’s (“Chengdu”) motion seeking a temporary restraining order (“TRO”) against “a slew of merchant Defendants” to enjoin “the manufacture, importation, distribution, sale, offer for sale, and profiting from...
July 14, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

There’s no Escaping the Public Eye: Judge Figueredo Denies EscapeX IP’s Motion to Seal, and Orders Google’s Previously Sealed Billing Records to be Unsealed

United States Magistrate Judge Figueredo recently denied Plaintiff EscapeX IP, LLC’s (“EscapeX”) efforts to seal its objections to billing records Defendant Google LLC (“Google”) had originally filed under seal in connection with its motion for sanctions.  Judge Figueredo also ordered...
June 27, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Judge Román Dismisses Infringement Claims Based “Upon Information and Belief” in Surgical Instruments Case

Judge Nelson S. Román (S.D.N.Y.) recently dismissed a patent-infringement complaint for failure to state a claim, emphasizing the requirement that plaintiffs plead factual allegations rather than legal conclusions.  Endobotics, LLC v. Fujifilm Healthcare Ams. Corp., No. 24-cv-2266 (NSR), 2025 WL...
June 12, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Judge Engelmayer Gets a Handle on “BlenderBottle” Patent Claims and Rejects Assertion of Indefiniteness

Judge Paul A. Engelmayer (S.D.N.Y.) recently construed claim terms at issue in a patent litigation between Plaintiffs Trove Brands, LLC, d/b/a The BlenderBottle Company, and Runway Blue, LLC (collectively, “Trove”) and Defendant Jia Wei Lifestyle, Inc. (“Jia Wei”).  Slip Op....
May 20, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Not a Repeat Offender: Magistrate Judge Bloom Declines to Sanction “Earnest” Pro Se Plaintiff for Re-filing Dismissed Case in a Proper Venue

On April 4, 2025, Magistrate Judge Lois Bloom (E.D.N.Y.) declined to sanction a pro se plaintiff for failing to conduct an adequate pre-suit investigation of whether his patent was infringed.  Plaintiff initially filed a complaint in the Eastern District of...
May 15, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Claims May Bend But Are Not Broken: Judge Locke Rejects Indefiniteness Arguments in Fiber Optic Cables Case

In a patent-infringement case involving fiber-optic-cable assemblies, Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke (E.D.N.Y.) recently rejected defendants’ arguments that two terms in the patent claims were indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112: “bend radius of ≥5D” and “slightly greater than.” “Bend Radius...
May 7, 2025
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Not for the Faint of Heart: Magistrate Judge Wicks Recommends Dismissal of Heart Monitoring Patent Case for Failure to Join a Necessary Party and under Section 101

United States Magistrate Judge James M. Wicks (E.D.N.Y.) recommended that Defendant Apple Inc.’s (“Apple”) motion to dismiss Plaintiff Joseph Wiesel’s (“Wiesel”) action for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,020,514 (the “’514 patent”) be granted for lack of standing and failure...
April 30, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

To Threat or Not to Threat, That is the DJ Question: Judge Rakoff Dismisses DJ Action and Finds the Court Does Not Have Jurisdiction to Address Request for Declaratory Relief

On April 1, 2025, United States District Judge Jed S. Rakoff granted Defendants Marut Enterprises LLC and Brett Marut’s (collectively, “Defendants”) motion to dismiss and entered final judgment against Foto Electric Supply Co., Inc. (“Plaintiff”). Plaintiff filed a declaratory judgment...
April 22, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Not That Kind of Memory Storage: Judge Oetken Grants Samsung’s Motion for Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement

On March 31, 2025, Judge Oetken granted summary judgment for Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and certain of its subsidiaries (“Samsung”) in an infringement suit brought against it by Dynamics Inc. (“Dynamics”).  Dynamics Inc v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 19-cv-6479,...
April 11, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Once Bitten, Twice Sanctioned: Judge Figueredo Awards Attorney’s Fees to Google for Being Forced to File a Motion to Dismiss

            On March 24, 2025, United States Magistrate Judge Valerie Figueredo granted-in-part Defendant Google LLC’s (“Google”) motion for sanctions, attorney’s fees, and costs against Plaintiff EscapeX IP, LLC (“EscapeX”) and its counsel (the “Ramey Firm”), pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §...
April 2, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

You Might Need a Lawyer if… the Judge Says you do: Judge Garnett Orders Case to be Dismissed for Failure to Secure Counsel

On March 11, 2025, District Judge Margaret M. Garnett dismissed SafeCast Limited’s (“SafeCast”) patent infringement lawsuit against Microsoft Corporation (“Microsoft”) because SafeCast failed to secure counsel. SafeCast Ltd. v. Microsoft Corp., No. 23-CV-05446 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11, 2025). SafeCast had been represented...
March 19, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

All Shimmer and No Shine: Magistrate Judge Willis Recommends Granting Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Personal Jurisdiction and Failure to State a Claim

Recently, Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis issued a Report and Recommendation recommending that defendant’s motion to dismiss pro se plaintiff Andrew Walker, Jr.’s (“Walker”) Second Amended Complaint be granted for lack of personal jurisdiction in Walker v. Kosann, No. 23-CV-4409...
March 14, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

There’s an Exception to Every Rule: Judge Schofield Finds a Comparison of the Plaintiff’s Patented System and the Accused System to be Relevant to Infringement

In a recently published opinion, Judge Lorna G. Schofield (S.D.N.Y.) found that it was appropriate to compare the accused system to a plaintiff’s commercial system embodying the asserted patent claims, rather than the patent claims themselves, to show non-infringement. The...
January 13, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

A Less Than Five-Star Review: Judge Furman Grants Motion to Dismiss Finding Claims Directed to a Rating System to be Abstract

On January 3, 2025, District Judge Jesse M. Furman granted Defendant Trustpilot, Inc.’s (“Trustpilot”) Motion to Dismiss Linfo IP, LLC’s (“Linfo”) complaint alleging that Trustpilot directly and indirectly infringed U.S. Patent No. 9,092,428 (the “’428 patent”). Linfo IP, LLC v....
January 9, 2025
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Judge Hellerstein Finds “Substantial Sales Activity” in U.S. Defeats MTD

United States District Judge Alvin K. Hellerstein (S.D.N.Y.) recently denied Defendant R-PAC International LLC’s motion to dismiss Plaintiff Adasa Inc.’s patent infringement complaint.  Slip Op. at 1.  Defendant moved under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) contending that “Plaintiff has not...
December 13, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

The Price of “Sandbagging”: Judge McMahon Orders Sanctions Against Patent Plaintiff For Switching Damages Theory on Eve of Retrial

On November 12, 2024, Judge McMahon (S.D.N.Y.) granted defendant Lutron Electronics Co.’s motion for sanctions against plaintiff Geigtech East Bay LLC, and precluded Geigtech from presenting any theory of damages on retrial other than the expert opinion it had presented...
November 25, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

You Can Go In-House, But You Can’t Hide: In-House Counsel Not Immune from Deposition

On November 13, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Victoria Reznik (S.D.N.Y.) granted-in-part and denied-in-part DJ Plaintiff Carvana, LLC’s (“Carvana”) motion for a Protective Order to preclude Defendant IBM from deposing Carvana’s in-house counsel, Ms. Jessica Wilson.             IBM sought Ms....
November 25, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

X Doesn’t Mark the Spot: Judge Halpern Denies a Motion for Summary Judgment That Alleged Failure to Comply with Marking Statute

On October 4, 2024, District Judge Philip M. Halpern (S.D.N.Y.) denied Defendant Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. (“Regeneron”)’s Motion for Summary Judgment that (1) Allele was not entitled to any pre-suit infringement damages because it did not properly mark; and (2) that...
October 17, 2024
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

To “Nonce” or Not to “Nonce”: Judge Merchant Considers Whether Patent Claims Recite “Nonce” Words Devoid of Structure

On October 11, 2024, Judge Orelia E. Merchant issued a decision construing the claims of three asserted patents in a litigation filed by Plaintiff Artec Europe S.A.R.L. (“Artec”) against Defendants Shenzhen Creality 3D Tech. Co., Ltd. and Shenzhen Jimuyida Technology...
October 16, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Quit Playing Games!: Judge Woods Grants Epic Games’ Motion to Dismiss

On September 26, 2024, District Judge Gregory H. Woods (S.D.N.Y.) granted Defendant Epic Games, Inc. (“Epic Games”)’s Motion to Dismiss for failure to state a claim because Plaintiff AK Meeting IP, LLC (“AK”)’s allegations were either conclusory or merely mimicked...
October 4, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Don’t Hit Send: Judge Rochon Denies Motion for Alternative Service via Email

On September 24, 2024, District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon (S.D.N.Y) denied Plaintiff Square One Choices, Inc. (“SOC”)’s Motion for Alternative Service because SOC failed to show that the Hague Convention permits service by email on defendants located in China. Slip...
October 4, 2024
Eastern District of New York (E.D.N.Y.)

Half-Zipped: Judge Chen Grants Summary Judgment of Non-Obviousness and Partial Summary Judgment of Non-Infringement on Garment Zipper Patent Claims

United States District Judge Pamela K. Chen (E.D.N.Y.) recently granted Plaintiff Shaf International, Inc. (“Shaf”)’s motion for summary judgment of validity of U.S. Patent No. 10,433,598 (the “’598 Patent”) and Defendant First Manufacturing Co., Inc. (“FMC”)’s motion for summary judgment...
October 1, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

Trekkies, Rejoice: Judge Schofield Denies Motion in Limine Regarding Star Trek Materials

Judge Schofield recently resolved several motions in limine brought by Plaintiff Kewazinga Corporation in a patent infringement lawsuit against Google.  Among the most notable rulings was her denial of a motion in limine regarding the Star Trek: The Next Generation...
September 30, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

You Snooze, You Lose: Judge Liman Grants Stay Pending Not-Yet-Instituted IPR When Plaintiff Waited Too Long to File Suit Against a Competitor

On September 9, 2024, Judge Lewis J. Liman granted a motion to stay pending the resolution of a U.S.P.T.O. inter partes review (“IPR”) filed by Defendant Tommy John, Inc. challenging the patentability of Plaintiff Pakage Apparel, Inc.’s asserted patent.  In...
September 30, 2024
Southern District of New York (S.D.N.Y.)

You Didn’t Quite Capture It – Judge Gardephe Rejects Several Allegations of Patent Infringement

On September 10, 2024, District Judge Paul G. Gardephe (S.D.N.Y.) granted in part Defendant Adobe, Inc.’s motion to dismiss for failing to plead “facts sufficient to establish infringement.” Plaintiff Douglas G. Richardson is a professional photographer with “several patents” related...
September 25, 2024

Page 1 of 6

Our Patent Practice

NYPatentDecisionsBlog.com is a source for the latest patent decisions from the U.S. District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York. The blog is authored by Patterson Belknap’s Patent Litigation practice group, whose members are highly experienced trial attorneys with extensive technical knowledge. Many have advanced scientific degrees and industry experience in fields such as communications, electrical and electro-optical technology, semiconductor technology, metallurgical engineering, chemistry and biochemistry. The team represents consumer products, electrical and software, medical device, mechanical, and pharmaceutical companies in a broad range of patent litigation matters, including district court cases, PTO and PTAB trial proceedings, patent licensing and contractual disputes concerning patent rights.

Read More

Editor in Chief

  • Contact Lewis V. Popovski.

    Lewis V. Popovski

    212.336.2610

    Email

Blog Contributors

  • Contact Lewis V. Popovski.

    Lewis V. Popovski

    212.336.2610

    Email

  • Contact Alexander A. Ivanovic.

    Alexander A. Ivanovic

    212.336.2293

    Email

  • Contact Tiffany Li.

    Tiffany Li

    212.336.2848

    Email

  • Contact Ryan J. Sheehan.

    Ryan J. Sheehan

    212.336.2123

    Email

  • Contact George S.  Soussou.

    George S. Soussou

    212.336.2208

    Email

  • Contact Matthew B. Weiss.

    Matthew B. Weiss

    212.336.2455

    Email

Posts
Subscribe

Firm Highlights

Event
Clint Morrison to Speak at Kisaco Research's 2026 Trade Secret Legal Protection North America Conference
On Monday, September 14, Partner Clint Morrison will speak on a panel at Kisaco Research's 2026 Trade Secret Legal Protection North America Conference titled "Reverse Engineering and Trade Secret Misappropriation: Where Courts are Drawing the Line." Mr. Morrison will join Carl Alexander Dinges (Partner, Bonabry), Eda Stark (Global IP Transactions & Litigation Managing Counsel, Olympus), and Victoria Cundiff (Adjust Professor, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School) to discuss when a reverse engineering defense may be helpful, and how recent decisions have brought the defense under the spotlight. To learn more, please click here.
Firm News
Firm Secures Complete Patent Litigation Victory on Behalf of J&J
On August 31, 2026, Patterson Belknap secured a victory on behalf of Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson) in a Hatch-Waxman patent infringement litigation relating to Spravato®, its blockbuster esketamine nasal spray approved for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression and major depressive disorder with suicidal ideation. This litigation was initiated after an ANDA filing by Sandoz, Inc. (“Sandoz”) in 2023, seeking FDA approval for its generic version of Spravato. Janssen asserted that Sandoz’s proposed generic product would infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 11,446,260, 10,869,844; 11,173,134; and 11,311,500.  Sandoz counterclaimed for declaratory judgment that each of the asserted patent claims was invalid under 35 U.S.C. §103 and/or § 112.  On August 31, 2026, the U.S. District...
Publication
SEC Proposes Regulation E-Delivery: Practical Implications
On July 16, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”) proposed Regulation E-Delivery[i], a new regulatory framework that would permit covered entities to deliver required information to investors and other recipients electronically as the default method, without first obtaining affirmative consent. Comments on the proposal are due September 21, 2026, and the Commission proposes a two-year compliance period following any final rule adoption. In Part 1 of this series, we provided an overview of proposed Regulation E-Delivery and defined its key concepts, including covered entities, covered information, and covered recipients. In Part 2, we explained how electronic delivery would function under the proposed rule. In Part 3, we address the practical implications and the potential economic impact...
Event
Firm Partners to Speak at Kisaco Research's 2026 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation North America Conference
On Tuesday, September 15, Partners Andrew D. Cohen and Lachlan S. Campbell-Verduyn will moderate a roundtable discussion at Kisaco Research's 2026 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation North America Conference titled "Formulation, Delivery, and Route-of-Administration Patents." Dr. Cohen and Dr. Campbell-Verduyn will explore how branded and biosimilar companies build, litigate, and defend formulation and delivery patents as core composition claims expire and these assets become the last line of exclusivity. To learn more, please click here.
Blog Post
Fees Recoverable by Oversecured Creditors in Bankruptcy: The Application of Code Sections 506(b) and 502(b)
Bankruptcy Code section 506(b) entitles an oversecured creditor to post-petition interest and reasonable fees and other charges. Are a creditor’s pre-petition charges also subject to a court’s view of what is reasonable? Courts are split on this issue. A judge in New York recently explained why, in his view, reasonableness is not the right standard for the pre-petition portion of a claim. Pre-petition charges should be determined by applicable state law and not a judge’s analysis of what is reasonable. In re 1300 Desert Willow Road, LLC, No. 25-11375, 2026 WL 2088511 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jul. 20, 2026). The debtor is a single-asset real estate company. The creditor had loaned the debtor $20 million secured by a mortgage on real property. The debtor...
Publication
SEC Proposes Regulation E-Delivery: How Will E-Delivery Work?
On July 16, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”) proposed Regulation E-Delivery[i], a new regulatory framework that would permit covered entities to deliver required information to investors and other recipients electronically as the default method, without first obtaining affirmative consent. In Part 1 of this 3-Part series, we provided an overview of proposed Regulation E-Delivery and defined its key concepts, including covered entities, covered information, and covered recipients. In this Part 2, we provide a high-level overview of how electronic delivery as proposed under Regulation E-Delivery is expected to function. In Part 3, we will address the practical implications Regulation E-Delivery is expected to have on covered entities. How Electronic Delivery is Expected to Work Electronic Address and...
Publication
IRS Proposes Standardized Rollover Forms and Process to Facilitate Plan-to-Plan Transfers
The Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) recently released Notice 2026-49 (the “Notice”), proposing sample forms and a standardized five-step process for rollovers to eligible retirement plans under Section 324 of the SECURE 2.0 Act. The proposed process is intended to simplify, standardize, facilitate, and expedite rollovers by shifting toward standardized, electronic, plan-to-plan processing. Use of the sample forms and procedures is currently optional, and the Notice does not provide safe harbors for plans that adopt them. Background The rollover process has long lacked uniformity, and has been burdened with inefficiencies and delays relating to the use of paper checks. The Government Accountability Office (“GAO”) reached similar conclusions in its 2013 and 2024 reports.[1] The Notice cites these concerns and explains that Section 324...
Firm News
Firm Achieves Appellate Victory on Behalf of Gilead Sciences
On August 13, 2026, Patterson Belknap secured a significant appellate victory for our client, Gilead Sciences, Inc. (“Gilead”), in a trademark lawsuit brought to stop the alleged illegal importation and sale in the United States of international, non-FDA-approved Gilead medicines. The Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit affirmed the district court’s issuance of a preliminary injunction against all defendants in the action, enjoining them from violating Gilead’s trademark rights by importing or facilitating the importation of these foreign medicines through illicit and potentially unsafe channels. The lawsuit was initially filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland in December 2024, after Gilead received a report from a concerned physician that a Maryland patient had received through the mail...
Blog Post
SEC Enforcement Launches New Financial Reporting and Accounting Unit
On August 5, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission announced its most recent step in its shift of enforcement priorities with the establishment of a new Financial Reporting and Accounting Unit.[1] According to the SEC’s press release, the Unit will operate within the Enforcement Division as a central resource for all SEC divisions pursuing financial reporting fraud as well as broader efforts.[2] This move is the latest in Chair Atkin’s efforts to “retur[n] the agency to its core mission of protecting investors; facilitating capital formation; and maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets.”[3] Commenting on the new unit’s launch, David Woodcock, Director of the Agency’s Enforcement Division, stated: Since my return to the Division, I have been assessing every aspect of our staffing to...
Blog Post
AI Companies Find Value in Bankrupt Companies
Spirit Airlines filed for bankruptcy in November 2024 and, after emerging from bankruptcy, filed again in August 2025. During the second case, the company tried to find a way to keep the airline in business but to no avail. In May 2026, Spirit Airlines pivoted towards a wind-down and ceased operations. This summer, as a part of its wind-down, Spirit Airlines began marketing its remaining assets. It had plenty of traditional assets to sell. For example, the debtors’ bid procedures motion filed in May 2026 listed the following assets: takeoff and landing slots at LaGuardia Airport; aircraft hangar(s); corporate headquarters; training center; multi-family residential buildings; ground service equipment; spare engines; flight simulators; aircraft maintenance equipment; and assets related to the...
Event
Clint Morrison to Speak at Kisaco Research's 2026 Trade Secret Legal Protection North America Conference
On Monday, September 14, Partner Clint Morrison will speak on a panel at Kisaco Research's 2026 Trade Secret Legal Protection North America Conference titled "Reverse Engineering and Trade Secret Misappropriation: Where Courts are Drawing the Line." Mr. Morrison will join Carl Alexander Dinges (Partner, Bonabry), Eda Stark (Global IP Transactions & Litigation Managing Counsel, Olympus), and Victoria Cundiff (Adjust Professor, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School) to discuss when a reverse engineering defense may be helpful, and how recent decisions have brought the defense under the spotlight. To learn more, please click here.
Firm News
Firm Secures Complete Patent Litigation Victory on Behalf of J&J
On August 31, 2026, Patterson Belknap secured a victory on behalf of Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson) in a Hatch-Waxman patent infringement litigation relating to Spravato®, its blockbuster esketamine nasal spray approved for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression and major depressive disorder with suicidal ideation. This litigation was initiated after an ANDA filing by Sandoz, Inc. (“Sandoz”) in 2023, seeking FDA approval for its generic version of Spravato. Janssen asserted that Sandoz’s proposed generic product would infringe certain claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 11,446,260, 10,869,844; 11,173,134; and 11,311,500.  Sandoz counterclaimed for declaratory judgment that each of the asserted patent claims was invalid under 35 U.S.C. §103 and/or § 112.  On August 31, 2026, the U.S. District...
Publication
SEC Proposes Regulation E-Delivery: Practical Implications
On July 16, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”) proposed Regulation E-Delivery[i], a new regulatory framework that would permit covered entities to deliver required information to investors and other recipients electronically as the default method, without first obtaining affirmative consent. Comments on the proposal are due September 21, 2026, and the Commission proposes a two-year compliance period following any final rule adoption. In Part 1 of this series, we provided an overview of proposed Regulation E-Delivery and defined its key concepts, including covered entities, covered information, and covered recipients. In Part 2, we explained how electronic delivery would function under the proposed rule. In Part 3, we address the practical implications and the potential economic impact...
Event
Firm Partners to Speak at Kisaco Research's 2026 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation North America Conference
On Tuesday, September 15, Partners Andrew D. Cohen and Lachlan S. Campbell-Verduyn will moderate a roundtable discussion at Kisaco Research's 2026 Pharma & Biotech Patent Litigation North America Conference titled "Formulation, Delivery, and Route-of-Administration Patents." Dr. Cohen and Dr. Campbell-Verduyn will explore how branded and biosimilar companies build, litigate, and defend formulation and delivery patents as core composition claims expire and these assets become the last line of exclusivity. To learn more, please click here.
Blog Post
Fees Recoverable by Oversecured Creditors in Bankruptcy: The Application of Code Sections 506(b) and 502(b)
Bankruptcy Code section 506(b) entitles an oversecured creditor to post-petition interest and reasonable fees and other charges. Are a creditor’s pre-petition charges also subject to a court’s view of what is reasonable? Courts are split on this issue. A judge in New York recently explained why, in his view, reasonableness is not the right standard for the pre-petition portion of a claim. Pre-petition charges should be determined by applicable state law and not a judge’s analysis of what is reasonable. In re 1300 Desert Willow Road, LLC, No. 25-11375, 2026 WL 2088511 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jul. 20, 2026). The debtor is a single-asset real estate company. The creditor had loaned the debtor $20 million secured by a mortgage on real property. The debtor...
Publication
SEC Proposes Regulation E-Delivery: How Will E-Delivery Work?
On July 16, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC” or “Commission”) proposed Regulation E-Delivery[i], a new regulatory framework that would permit covered entities to deliver required information to investors and other recipients electronically as the default method, without first obtaining affirmative consent. In Part 1 of this 3-Part series, we provided an overview of proposed Regulation E-Delivery and defined its key concepts, including covered entities, covered information, and covered recipients. In this Part 2, we provide a high-level overview of how electronic delivery as proposed under Regulation E-Delivery is expected to function. In Part 3, we will address the practical implications Regulation E-Delivery is expected to have on covered entities. How Electronic Delivery is Expected to Work Electronic Address and...
Litigation, Disputes & Investigationsicon right
Exempt Organizations & Private Clientsicon right
Corporate & Transactionsicon right
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe
  • Disclaimer
  • Privacy Policy

1133 Avenue of the Americas New York, New York 10036 | Tel: 212.336.2000
© 2026 Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP. All rights reserved. Attorney Advertising. Website Credits