3 Significant Patent Cases You Should Watch Closely In 2024
The original article was written by Jason Wilcox and Ellisen Turner of Kirkland & Ellis.
The year 2024 has some significant patent cases that could shift the patent industry. There are some very important court cases coming up that will deal with everything from the rules about design patents to how secure messaging and smart speakers are protected by law. Here are three big cases you should watch closely this year.
LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations
At the heart of the LKQ Corp. vs. GM Global Technology Operations LLC case is a dispute over a design patent held by GM for an ornamental design of a vehicle front fender. LKQ Corporation and Keystone Automotive Industries, Inc., challenged the patent, arguing that it was either anticipated by prior art or should be considered obvious. This case brings to the forefront the test for obviousness in design patents, especially in light of the Supreme Court’s decision in KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc., which may conflict with established tests for design patent obviousness.
On February 5th, a full court will listen to arguments in a case where LKQ, after failing to challenge GM's design patents at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, argues that the current tests for design patents are outdated and clash with a 2007 decision by the U.S. Supreme Court called KSR v. Teleflex.
The implications of this case are vast, with potential impacts on competition in the automotive repair parts market, the protection of design innovations, and the broader marketplace. A shift in how design patents are evaluated for obviousness could make it more challenging to protect design innovations but also open the door for increased competition and innovation.
The case is LKQ Corp. v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, case numbers 21-2348 and 22-1253, in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
VirnetX Inc. v. Mangrove Partners Master Fund
The battle between VirnetX, a company specializing in secure communication technologies, and Mangrove Partners Master Fund, a hedge fund challenging VirnetX's patents, highlights the complexities of patent validity under the America Invents Act. Mangrove Partners argued that certain claims of VirnetX's patents were either anticipated by prior art or obvious, leading the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to find some claims unpatentable.
This case underscores the ongoing debate over the standards for patent validity, particularly in the technology sector where the pace of innovation is rapid and the stakes are high. The outcomes could influence how patents are challenged and defended, impacting not just the parties involved but also the broader landscape of patent law and innovation.
The justices haven't scheduled a conference yet to review the petition.
Google LLC v. Sonos Inc.
The dispute between Google LLC and Sonos Inc. over patents related to the management of smart speakers in a multiroom system is another critical case to watch. Sonos accuses Google of infringing on its technology for wireless audio devices, such as the Google Home system.
This case is about more than just two tech giants battling it out in court; it's indicative of the broader struggles over intellectual property rights in the fast-evolving tech industry.
Sonos must submit their appeal in February. The outcome could have significant implications for how companies protect and leverage their innovations in smart technology, impacting future developments in the smart home and audio markets.
Coming January 25, 2024, Patexia will release an in-depth evaluation of all district court patent litigation cases, identifying the top attorneys and law firms in patent litigation based on their activities and performance. This analysis is essential for anyone looking to navigate the complexities of patent litigation with the insight of proven expertise.