Yufa v. Lockheed Martin Corp., Case No. 2014-1256 (August 6, 2014) (non-precedential), U.S. Patent Nos. 6,034,769; 6,346,983

Key point(s):

• Negative claim limitations added during prosecution are substantive limitations.

Scriptpro, LLC v. Innovation Associates, Inc., Case No. 2013-1561 (August 6, 2014) (precedential) (3-0), U.S. Patent Nos. 6,910,601

Key point(s):

• That a specification describes embodiments having a component does not necessarily mean that claims excluding that component are unsupported by the written description.

Tyco Healthcare Group LP v. Mutual Pharmaceutical Co., Inc., Case No. 2013-1386 (August 6, 2014) (precedential) (2-1)

Key point(s):

• An antitrust counterclaim can survive summary judgment if there are disputed issues of fact regarding whether the claim against the litigant constitutes sham litigation.

Albecker v. Contour Products, Inc. (FL), Case No. 2014-1318 (August 7, 2014) (non-precedential), U.S. Patent No. 5,836,653

Key point(s):

• The doctrine of claim differentiation is not a rigid rule, and strong evidence supporting a district court construction can overcome a claim differentiation argument.

Cutino v. Nightlife Media, Inc., Case No. 2013-1541 (August 7, 2014) (non-precedential), Trademark Application No. 77/325,174

Key point(s):

• An admission of ownership of a mark in an answer to a petition also constitutes an admission that the mark is active.