Fresh From the Bench: Latest Precedential Patent Cases

CASE OF THE WEEK

Trustees of Columbia University v. Gen Digital Inc., Appeal No. 2024-1243 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 11, 2026)

In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit vacated a $185 million damages award for willful infringement of Columbia University’s computer security patents by Norton antivirus software, and remanded for further proceedings.  Columbia asserted claims from U.S. Patent Nos. 8,601,322 and 8,074,115, which the Federal Circuit found to be directed to an abstract idea at step one of the patent-eligibility inquiry under Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), and directed the district court on remand to consider whether the claims incorporated an inventive concept at Alice step two.  The Court also reviewed issues of claim construction, willfulness, and damages for foreign sales that could arise on remand should the lower court determine the claims are directed to patent-eligible subject matter.

READ MORE

ALSO THIS WEEK

Read the full summaries via the button below.

Trustees of Columbia University v. Gen Digital Inc., Appeal No. 2024-1244 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 11, 2026)

In a companion case to our Case of the Week, the district court reversed a sanctions order against the law firm Quinn Emanuel.  In relation to an inventorship claim raised in the case against one of Norton’s patents, Quinn Emanuel had entered into an attorney/client relationship with a witness in the case, who had previously worked for Norton.  In the intervening years, that witness indicated his views that Columbia’s researchers should have been given inventorship of Norton’s patents.  The district court found that to be a conflict of interest that waived attorney-client privilege, and ordered Quinn to produce documents relevant to their representation of the witness.  Quinn refused, resulting in a contempt order against Quinn, an adverse instruction at trial, and a finding of enhanced damages for improper litigation conduct...

Richard Gramm v. Deere & Company, Appeal No. 2024-1598 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 11, 2026)

In an appeal from a district court’s conclusion of invalidity of a claim reciting a “control means” limitation, the Court reviewed whether a general reference in the specification to commercial embodiments used in crop harvesters was a sufficient disclosure of corresponding structure to support the means-plus-function claim limitation.  The Court agreed with defendant (Deere & Co.) that the algorithm requirement for computer-implemented means-plus-function terms is triggered when a patentee relies on commercial embodiments that employ general purpose hardware, and found no error in the district court’s conclusion of lack of a prose algorithm in the specification...

Implicit, LLC v. Sonos, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1173, -1174 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 9, 2026)

On appeal of an inter partes review decision finding challenged claims to be unpatentable, the Federal Circuit found that patentee Implicit forfeited a prior art antedating argument notwithstanding that an intervening inventorship correction under 35 U.S.C. § 256 would have resulted in earlier “conception” dates for the claims at issue...

READ MORE

Editors:

Nika Aldrich, IP Litigation Group Leader, Schwabe

Jason A. Wrubleski, Shareholder

Contributors:

Michael A. Cofield, Shareholder

Julia Davis, Associate