Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
On March 5, 2024, a Federal Circuit panel of Judges Moore, Stoll, and Cunningham issued a unanimous opinion, authored by Chief Judge Moore, in Chewy, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corp., Case No. 22-1756. International Business Machines Corp. (IBM) owns U.S. Patent Nos. 7,7072,849 (the '849 patent) and 7,7076,443 (the '443 patent). The '849 patent is directed to improved methods for presenting advertisements to a user of an interactive service. Slip. Op. at 2. The '443 patent is directed to improved systems and methods for targeting advertisements. Id. Chewy, Inc. (Chewy) sought a declaratory judgment of noninfringement of the '849 and '443 patents. Id. at 3. IBM filed counterclaims alleging Chewy infringed the patents. Id. The United States District Court for the Southern District of New York granted Chewy's motion for summary judgment of noninfringement of claims 1, 2, 12, 14, and 18 of the '849 patent. Id. The district court also granted Chewy's motion for summary judgment that claims 13, 15, 16, and 17 of the '443 patent are ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101. Id. IBM appealed both summary judgment rulings. Id.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's grant of summary judgment of noninfringement of claims 1, 2, 14, and 18 of the '849 patent. The district court had construed the limitation "selectively storing" in the claims to mean the advertising objects must be "pre-fetched." Id. at 5. IBM argued that the proper construction does not require "pre-fetching." Id. The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's construction because there are repeated written descriptions of the invention as including pre-fetching and the '849 patent uniformly refers to the pre-fetching as an aspect of the invention as a whole. Id. at 5-6. The prosecution history also showed that the applicant explained that selectively storing means advertising objects are pre-fetch. Id. at 8. IBM argued that even under the district court's construction, there is a factual dispute regarding whether Chewy's website or mobile applications selectively store advertising objects. Id. at 9. The Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that "pre-fetching" requires advertisements be retrieved and stored before the user requests a page. Id. at 10. Because Chewy only retrieves advertisements in response to a user requesting a page, the Federal Circuit found no material factual dispute that Chewy does not perform the selectively storing limitation. Id.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
In recent years, there has been a growing number of dry cleaners claiming to be "organic," "green," or "eco-friendly." While that may be true with respect to some, many dry cleaners continue to use a cleaning method involving the use of a solvent called perchloroethylene, commonly known as perc. And, there seems to be an increasing number of lawsuits stemming from environmental problems associated with historic dry cleaning operations utilizing this chemical.
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Blockchain domain names offer decentralized alternatives to traditional DNS-based domain names, promising enhanced security, privacy and censorship resistance. However, these benefits come with significant challenges, particularly for brand owners seeking to protect their trademarks in these new digital spaces.
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.