专利侵权

Search documents
苹果躲过一劫:21亿 LTE专利侵权赔偿案被推翻
Feng Huang Wang· 2025-06-18 06:45
Group 1 - Apple won a significant legal victory in a long-standing patent lawsuit against Optis Wireless Technology, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit overturned a lower court ruling that required Apple to pay $300 million in damages [1][2] - The case was sent back to Texas for retrial due to flawed jury instructions in the previous trial, marking the second time that a nine-figure patent damages award to Optis has been overturned [1][2] - Optis, a Texas-based intellectual property management company, initially sued Apple in 2019, claiming that iPhones and other Apple products infringed on patents related to LTE wireless standards [1] Group 2 - In the second trial, the jury reduced the damages to $300 million, but Apple appealed and won, with the appellate court focusing on the jury's decision-making process rather than the specific amount of damages [2] - The appellate court noted that the lower court's judge improperly combined multiple patents into a single infringement issue, which deprived Apple of the right to a unanimous verdict on each legal claim against it [2] - An Optis spokesperson expressed confidence that the court would determine a fair compensation amount for the patents critical to enabling high-speed connections for millions of Apple devices [2]
外媒:苹果赢得上诉,推翻3亿美元专利赔偿判决
Huan Qiu Wang· 2025-06-18 03:03
Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Federal Circuit Court has made a favorable ruling for Apple Inc. by overturning a previous jury's decision that awarded $300 million in patent infringement damages to Optis Wireless Technology, related to its wireless standard essential patents [1][4]. Group 1: Court Ruling Details - The appellate court's decision to dismiss Optis's lawsuit was based on the recognition of flaws in the jury instructions during the prior trial, and the case has been sent back to Texas for a new trial [4]. - This ruling marks the second time Optis has faced the overturning of a nine-figure U.S. patent judgment in this case [4]. - The initial jury had ruled in 2020 that Apple should pay Optis $506 million, but the U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap later ordered a retrial on the damages issue, questioning the fairness of the compensation [4]. Group 2: Optis's Position and Other Legal Matters - Despite the setback, Optis's spokesperson expressed confidence in obtaining fair compensation for its key patents, which provide high-speed connectivity for millions of Apple devices [4]. - In a separate case, a UK court recently ruled that Apple must pay Optis $502 million for infringing its wireless patents in the UK, and Apple plans to appeal this ruling [5].
资本游戏还是两方对垒?护肤品牌绽美娅卷进隔空骂战的隐秘角落
经济观察报· 2025-06-13 12:54
Core Viewpoint - The ongoing disputes in the beauty industry reflect marketing strategies and tactics, with conflicts becoming a means to generate traffic, ultimately harming consumers who struggle to discern product authenticity [1][4]. Group 1: Dispute Overview - The conflict began when Aierfu criticized Zhenmeiya for allegedly misleading claims regarding the development of artificial skin technology, which Aierfu claims infringes on its patented technology [2][4]. - Zhenmeiya responded by asserting that it developed its own technology unrelated to Aierfu's patents, claiming that Aierfu's patent had expired and thus entered the public domain [3][9]. Group 2: Patent and Technology Details - Aierfu holds a patent for "tissue-engineered skin," which was reported to have expired in October 2021, while Zhenmeiya claims its technology is based on a different patent for a 3D epidermal model used in skincare product testing [7][9]. - The core of the dispute revolves around the interpretation of patent rights and the distinction between patent inventors and patent holders, with both companies asserting their respective claims [7][12]. Group 3: Industry Implications - The frequent conflicts in the beauty industry indicate a lack of transparency and standards, leading to confusion among consumers regarding product claims and authenticity [21][22]. - Experts suggest that the industry needs to establish clearer standards and verification mechanisms to help consumers make informed decisions about beauty products [22].
资本游戏还是两方对垒?护肤品牌绽美娅卷进隔空骂战的隐秘角落
Jing Ji Guan Cha Wang· 2025-06-13 12:52
Core Viewpoint - The ongoing dispute between Aierfu and Zhanmeiya highlights the complexities of patent rights and marketing strategies in the beauty industry, raising concerns about consumer trust and product authenticity [3][13]. Group 1: Company Dispute - Aierfu accused Zhanmeiya of infringing on its patent related to engineered skin technology, claiming that Zhanmeiya's promotional statements mislead consumers about the origins of the technology [1][4]. - Zhanmeiya responded by asserting that the patents in question had expired and that their technology is independently developed, thus denying any infringement [2][6]. - The core of the conflict revolves around the marketing claims made by Zhanmeiya regarding their products, which Aierfu argues misrepresents the relationship between the two companies and their respective technologies [4][8]. Group 2: Industry Implications - The dispute reflects a broader issue within the beauty industry, where marketing tactics often overshadow transparency and consumer education, leading to confusion about product efficacy [3][13]. - Experts suggest that the lack of clear industry standards contributes to the ongoing conflicts, making it difficult for consumers to discern the authenticity of claims made by brands [3][13]. - The situation underscores the need for improved regulatory frameworks to ensure fair competition and protect consumer interests in the rapidly evolving beauty market [3][13].
美光突然翻供!推翻与长江存储达成的协议裁决
是说芯语· 2025-06-10 02:16
美光( Micron)与长江存储(YMTC)的法律纠纷出现新转折:这家美国芯片巨头以国家安全担 忧为由,试图推翻此前达成的协议和法院裁决。 根据先前裁决,长江存储获得了美光 73 页机密 3D NAND 技术文档的访问权限,但美光现在希望 撤销这一决定,阻止长江存储获取相关信息。 外媒表示, 尽管美光的请求在看似不同寻常,但此 举背后可能有其动机。 美光已向最高法院申请 "mandamus 令状"(法院要求下级机构履行法定职责的命令),对下级法 院的裁决提出质疑。在 2023 年的诉讼中,长江存储指控美光专利侵权,下级法院允许长江存储在 证据开示程序中获得 73 页美光机密文档的纸质副本。 美光辩称,地区法院忽视了保护令的关键条款,因此未能考虑到向一家被列入美国商务部实体清 单、由中国政府支持的公司披露敏感半导体信息所涉及的国家安全担忧。 美光的论点始于纠纷的性质。在 2023 年的案件中,长江存储指控美光的 3D NAND 存储产品侵犯 其多项专利。证据开示程序根据双方共同达成的保护令进行,该保护令限制对高度敏感材料(如源 代码)的访问,仅限外部律师和专家接触,公司员工不得参与。此外,保护令还规定纸质副本总 ...
默沙东(MRK.US)陷专利诉讼泥潭 抗癌药Keytruda新剂型恐面临禁售令
智通财经网· 2025-04-24 13:52
智通财经APP获悉,生物科技公司Halozyme Therapeutics Inc.(HALO.US)起诉默沙东(MRK.US),试图阻 止其推出更易使用的重磅抗癌药Keytruda新剂型,指控这家制药巨头侵犯其知识产权。 根据周四向美国新泽西地区法院提交的诉讼文件,默沙东在开发可皮下注射版Keytruda(替代静脉输注 剂型)时,故意侵犯了Halozyme的专利。Halozyme要求法院禁止新版Keytruda的商业化上市——该产品 预计将于今年晚些时候推出。 Keytruda在2024年为默沙东创造近300亿美元收入,已成为癌症治疗的基石和制药史上最畅销产品。但 这款占默沙东近半数营收的药物,预计将在2028年面临低价竞争和政府定价谈判。默沙东计划在该剂型 获批后尽快让患者转换用药,这意味着任何上市延迟都可能打乱公司的长期规划。 Halozyme首席执行官海伦·托利今年3月表示,公司希望与默沙东达成授权协议,仅当计划落空时才会采 取法律行动。 皮下注射剂型对默沙东的未来增长至关重要。该公司未立即回应就诉讼置评的请求。默沙东此前曾表 示,认为Halozyme相关专利无效,并对自身法律立场充满信心。为开发注射 ...