search
federal appeals court
Trends
- 1Apple ordered to pay record $5.7 billion in haptic patent case●US jury says Apple owes record $5.7B in haptic technology patent case
A US jury has ruled that Apple owes $5.7 billion in a patent dispute over haptic technology, described as a record award of its kind. The verdict, delivered in federal court, is one of the largest patent damages ever handed down against the iPhone maker and is likely to be appealed as the company contests the ruling.
- 2Federal Circuit Upholds Ruling for Google in Patent Dispute●CAFC Affirms Section 101 Dismissal for Google Over Internet Advertising Patents
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has affirmed a lower court's dismissal of patents covering internet advertising technology owned by a party challenging Google. The court found the claims ineligible under Section 101 of the Patent Act, which governs whether inventions are patentable subject matter. The decision is being closely watched by intellectual property practitioners, as it adds to the line of Federal Circuit rulings limiting software and business-method patents in the digital advertising space.
- 3EFF urges court to strike drone rule barring filming immigration agents●Vacate a drone restriction that criminalized recording immigration agents
The Electronic Frontier Foundation is pressing the DC Circuit to vacate a drone flight restriction that effectively criminalized recording immigration agents from the air. The group argues the rule blocks lawful First Amendment activity, preventing the public and journalists from documenting federal immigration enforcement operations. The case is now before the appeals court, drawing attention from civil liberties advocates.
- 4Appeals court upholds Anthropic supply chain risk designation●U.S. appeals court upholds designation of Anthropic as supply chain risk
A U.S. appeals court has upheld the government's designation of AI company Anthropic as a supply chain risk, a decision with implications for the firm's ability to work with federal agencies and defense-related programs. The ruling keeps in place an earlier determination, and the case is being closely watched across the tech industry as a test of how national security rules apply to leading artificial intelligence developers.