Tag: collateral estoppel
-
AML IP v. Bath & Body Works Direct: Federal Circuit Allows Section 101 Dismissal After Finding Patent Venue Improper
The Federal Circuit’s decision in AML IP, LLC v. Bath & Body Works Direct, Inc., Case No. 2025-1280 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 28, 2026), holds that a district court may, in appropriate circumstances, decide a fully briefed merits defense even after concluding that patent venue is improper. Because venue is a waivable protection belonging to the…
-
Kroy IP Holdings v. Groupon: The Federal Circuit Draws a Hard Line on IPR Collateral Estoppel
The Federal Circuit’s August 1, 2025 order denying rehearing en banc in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., No. 23-1359, leaves intact a panel decision that sharply limits the collateral-estoppel effect of PTAB unpatentability decisions in subsequent district court litigation. The denial is notable not because of its brevity—en banc denials are routine—but because…
-
ParkerVision v. Qualcomm: Collateral Estoppel and Expert Exclusion in Patent Litigation
After more than a decade of litigation between ParkerVision and Qualcomm, the Federal Circuit has vacated summary judgment of non-infringement and reversed key Daubert rulings that had hobbled ParkerVision’s case. The court’s decision in ParkerVision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc., Nos. 2022-1755, 2024-2221 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 6, 2024), sheds new light on the proper application of…