Amid a backlash against so-called patent trolls, plaintiffs in patent cases are facing a multipronged movement to tighten the pleading requirements that govern their infringement claims. Some of these efforts are centered in Congress, which is considering multiple patent reform bills. But others are coming from the judicial branch—a point clearly illustrated last week in a ruling by a federal judge in Virginia.
In a forceful 18-page opinion, U.S. District Judge Robert Payne in Richmond dismissed most of a patent infringement suit that Macronix International Co. filed against Spansion Inc., saying that Macronix’s claims were vague, unspecific and “bare-bones.”
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
