Corephotonics, Ltd.

8 Cited authorities

  1. Apple Inc. v. Corephotonics, Ltd.

    No. 2020-1438 (Fed. Cir. Jun. 23, 2021)   Cited 3 times

    2020-1438 06-23-2021 APPLE INC., Appellant v. COREPHOTONICS, LTD., Appellee Debra Janece McComas, Haynes & Boone, LLP, Dallas, TX, argued for appellant. Also represented by Andrew S. Ehmke; Angela Oliver, Washington, DC; Michael Scott Parsons, Plano, TX. Marc Aaron Fenster, Russ August & Kabat, Los Angeles, CA, argued for appellee. Also represented by Brian David Ledahl, Neil Rubin. Stoll, Circuit Judge. This disposition is nonprecedential. Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office

  2. Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,124 times   478 Legal Analyses
    Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."
  3. Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty

    35 U.S.C. § 102   Cited 5,990 times   998 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"
  4. Section 253 - Disclaimer

    35 U.S.C. § 253   Cited 180 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Granting patentee authority to disclaim issued or pending claims
  5. Section 317 - Settlement

    35 U.S.C. § 317   Cited 37 times   48 Legal Analyses
    Addressing continuation of IPR as to some petitioners after dismissal of others
  6. Section 1.321 - Statutory disclaimers, including terminal disclaimers

    37 C.F.R. § 1.321   Cited 75 times   34 Legal Analyses
    Incorporating the language of § 253
  7. Section 42.73 - Judgment

    37 C.F.R. § 42.73   Cited 18 times   61 Legal Analyses
    Regarding judgments
  8. Section 42.2 - Definitions

    37 C.F.R. § 42.2   Cited 7 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Defining "party" as "at least the petitioner and the patent owner"