Tessa Kroll
Subscribe to Tessa Kroll's PostsTessa Kroll focuses her practice on intellectual property litigation matters. She is a registered patent agent. Read Tessa Kroll's full bio.
Equivalence Requires Element-by-Element Proof With Linking Argument
By Tessa Kroll on Nov 7, 2024
Posted In Patents
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court determination that a patent owner had not provided the “particularized testimony and linking argument” required to demonstrate equivalence under the doctrine of equivalents. NexStep, Inc. v. Comcast Cable Commc’ns, LLC, Case No. 2022-1815 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 24, 2024) (Chen, Taranto, JJ.) (Reyna,...
Continue Reading
Don’t Mess With Anna: Texas Town Schools Patent Owner on § 101
By Tessa Kroll on Aug 1, 2024
Posted In Patents
On cross-appeals from a granted Fed. R. of Civ. Pro. 12(c) motion on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent directed to a method for “assist[ing] an investigator in conducting a background investigation” did not claim patent-eligible subject matter, but that the mere assertion of the...
Continue Reading
E for Effort? PI Analysis in Trade Secret Suit Riddled With Errors
By Tessa Kroll on Jun 27, 2024
Posted In Trade Secrets
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the granting of a sweeping preliminary injunction (PI) in a trade secret suit against a competitor, finding that the district court’s analysis failed to consider potentially dispositive issues and the requirements of the Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA). Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow, Co., Case No....
Continue Reading
Cross-Appeals Fail to Strike a Chord
By Tessa Kroll on May 2, 2024
Posted In Patents
In the latest development in the ongoing litigation saga between competitors Sonos and Google, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the US International Trade Commission’s determination that the original accused audio players and controllers infringed the asserted patents while redesigned products did not. Sonos, Inc. v. Int’l Trade Comm’n, Case No....
Continue Reading
Taking the High Road: Ambiguity Regarding “Versions” of Beer Precludes Summary Judgment
By Tessa Kroll on Apr 4, 2024
Posted In Trademarks
The US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed a district court’s summary judgment denial and determination that the definition of “beer” (which encompassed “other versions and combinations” of beer and malt beverages) in a trademark licensing agreement was ambiguous. Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC,...
Continue Reading
Lost Connection: Preliminary Injunction Against Unreleased Product Is a No-Go
By Tessa Kroll on Feb 15, 2024
Posted In Patents
Addressing a preliminary injunction motion directed to a competitor’s yet-to-be-released product, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding that the patent holder failed to establish irreparable harm based on speculative evidence. SmartSky Networks, LLC v. Gogo Bus. Aviation, LLC, Case No....
Continue Reading
Grubhub Relishes Victory Against Trademark Preliminary Injunction
By Tessa Kroll on Sep 28, 2023
Posted In Trademarks
Upholding the denial of a preliminary injunction motion in a trademark infringement dispute, the US Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit concluded that the district court did not err in finding that the trademark owner failed to show a likelihood of success on its reverse confusion theory. Grubhub Inc. v. Relish Labs LLC, Case...
Continue Reading
Hit Rewind: Analogous Art and Field of Endeavor
By Tessa Kroll on Sep 21, 2023
Posted In Patents
Addressing the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s application of the field of endeavor and reasonably pertinent tests for determining analogous art, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the Board should not have required a petitioner to precisely articulate the relevant field of endeavor for the patent and prior art using...
Continue Reading
Petitioner Reply May Include New Evidence if Responsive to Patent Owner and Based on Original Legal Contentions
By Tessa Kroll on Aug 24, 2023
Posted In Patents
Addressing the issue of new invalidity theories offered during inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a petitioner does not improperly offer new theories when it merely expands on previously raised arguments and responds to a patent owner’s assertions without advancing a “meaningfully distinct [invalidity] contention.”...
Continue Reading
New Claim Construction in Patent Owner’s Post-Initiation IPR Response? Sure, Charge Away
By Tessa Kroll on Aug 17, 2023
Posted In Patents
Addressing the issue of new claim constructions presented by a patent owner after the institution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a petitioner is entitled to argue and present evidence under the new construction so long as it relies on the same prior art...
Continue Reading
