Fresh From the Bench: Latest Precedential Patent Cases

N
Nika Aldrich
Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt
March 9, 2026PTAB1 min read

Contributed by Schwabe Williamson & Wyatt. Originally published on Patexia; republished here as part of the LexDana archive.

CASE OF THE WEEK

Magnolia Medical Technologies, Inc. v. Kurin, Inc., Appeal No. 2024-2001 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2026)


Our Case of the Week touches on two claim construction issues – a post-jury-verdict “clarification” of a claim term by a judge, who overturned a jury verdict, and a determination whether the term “diverter” was subject to Section 112(f) as a “means-plus-function” term.

The patents in suit are directed to improved products for taking blood samples.  Historically, blood samples would get tainted with microbes on the skin that were dislodged and transferred into the sample through the needle.  This yielded false-positive results.  The invention improved upon this with a device that sequestered the first portion of the sample, and then separately stored the remainder of the sample.  One patent recited a fluid reservoir that had a “vent” and a “seal.”  A second patent recited a “diverter.”

READ MORE

ALSO THIS WEEK

Exafer Ltd. v. Microsoft Corporation, Appeal No. 2024-2296 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 6, 2026)


On appeal from a grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant Microsoft, the Federal Circuit reversed the exclusion of expert damages testimony for patentee Exafer and remanded for further proceedings.  In holding the challenged testimony admissible, the reviewing panel clarified that in assessing a reasonable royalty, a patentee may permissibly rely on non-infringing aspects of the technology at issue to support inferences about the defendant’s valuation and use of accused features.

READ MORE

Editors:

Nika Aldrich, IP Litigation Group Leader, Schwabe

Jason A. Wrubleski, Shareholder

More insights

Data: FDA Orange & Purple Books · prosecution & litigation metadata · read-only.