Condensed IP

EXPLORE

Society & Culture

Health & Fitness

© 2024 PodJoint

https://is1-ssl.mzstatic.com/image/thumb/Podcasts221/v4/55/4f/9a/554f9aad-160e-adb7-311f-87d3fb4d7269/mza_7481912942923426576.jpg/600x600bb.jpg

Condensed IP

Randy Noranbrock

51 episodes

6 days ago

This episode relates to a United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion regarding a patent infringement case, Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation decided October 27, 2025. The core dispute involves the correct claim construction of the term "outer frame" in patents concerning transcatheter aortic valve replacement devices. The Plaintiff-Appellant, Aortic Innovations, appealed a stipulated judgment of non-infringement, which was based on the District Cou...

Show more...

Entrepreneurship

All content for Condensed IP is the property of Randy Noranbrock and is served directly from their servers with no modification, redirects, or rehosting. The podcast is not affiliated with or endorsed by Podjoint in any way.

This episode relates to a United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion regarding a patent infringement case, Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation decided October 27, 2025. The core dispute involves the correct claim construction of the term "outer frame" in patents concerning transcatheter aortic valve replacement devices. The Plaintiff-Appellant, Aortic Innovations, appealed a stipulated judgment of non-infringement, which was based on the District Cou...

Show more...

Entrepreneurship

Episodes (20/51)

Condensed IP

Aortic Innovations v. Edwards Lifesciences (Fed. Cir., October 27, 2025) 2024-1145

This episode relates to a United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion regarding a patent infringement case, Aortic Innovations LLC v. Edwards Lifesciences Corporation decided October 27, 2025. The core dispute involves the correct claim construction of the term "outer frame" in patents concerning transcatheter aortic valve replacement devices. The Plaintiff-Appellant, Aortic Innovations, appealed a stipulated judgment of non-infringement, which was based on the District Cou...

6 days ago

11 minutes

Condensed IP

Centripetal Networks v. Palo Alto Networks (Fed. Cir., October 22, 2025) 2023-2027

This episode concerns a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding Centripetal Networks, LLC v. Palo Alto Networks, Inc. et al., decided on October 22, 2025. The core of the case involves Centripetal Networks appealing a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) that held certain claims of their patent unpatentable as obvious. A significant issue addressed is Centripetal’s claim that the PTAB’s decision was "tainted" due to the belated recusa...

1 week ago

12 minutes

Condensed IP

Barrette Outdoor Living v. Fortress Iron (Fed. Cir., October 17, 2025) 2024-1231

This episode focuses on an opinion by the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, concerning a patent infringement case between Barrette Outdoor Living, Inc. (Plaintiff-Appellant) and Fortress Iron, LP, et al. (Defendants-Cross-Appellants). Barrette appealed a lower court's finding of non-infringement related to four of its patents, while Fortress cross-appealed the finding that the claims were not indefinite. The central issue on appeal revolved around the construction of ter...

1 week ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Causam v. ecobee (Fed. Cir., October 15, 2025) 2024-1958

This episode concerns the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's opinion in the case of Causam Enterprises, Inc. v. ecobee Technologies ULC, decided on October 15, 2025. The core issue is an appeal from a decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board), which had ruled that several claims of Causam's U.S. Patent No. 10,394,268 were unpatentable due to obviousness following an inter partes review (IPR) initiated by ecobee. The court addresses two main arguments raised b...

2 weeks ago

12 minutes

Condensed IP

Causam v. ITC (Fed. Cir., October 15, 2025) 2023-1769

This episode details an opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding an appeal in the case of Causam Enterprises, Inc. v. International Trade Commission (ITC). The core issue originated from Causam's complaint to the ITC alleging that various companies, including Resideo Smart Homes Technology and ecobee Technologies ULC, were violating a section of the Tariff Act by importing and selling "smart" thermostats that infringed upon Causam's '268 patent related...

2 weeks ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Inland Diamond Products v Cherry Optical (Fed. Cir., October 15, 2025) 2024-1106

This opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, dated October 15, 2025, concerns the case of Inland Diamond Products Co. v. Cherry Optical Inc. The court addresses an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin, which had granted summary judgment that Inland’s asserted patent claims were invalid for obviousness based on the doctrine of issue preclusion following previous inter partes reviews (IPRs). The Federal Circuit determined tha...

2 weeks ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Brita v. ITC (Fed. Cir., October 15, 2025) 2024-1098

This opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, dated October 15, 2025, concerns the patent infringement case of Brita LP v. International Trade Commission (ITC). The court is reviewing Brita's appeal of an ITC decision that found certain claims of Brita's U.S. Patent No. 8,167,141 invalid. Specifically, the patent relates to gravity flow filter media designed to remove contaminants, defined by a metric called the Filter Rate and Performance (FRAP) factor. The Fe...

2 weeks ago

11 minutes

Condensed IP

US Inventor v. USPTO (Fed. Cir., October 3, 2025) 2024-1396

This episode is about a United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit opinion, decided on October 3, 2025, concerning the case of US Inventor, Inc. v. United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO). The core issue of the appeal was whether the plaintiffs-appellants, US Inventor, Inc. and National Small Business United, had standing to sue the PTO for denying their petition for rulemaking. This petition sought to limit the PTO’s discretionary authority to institute inter partes revie...

3 weeks ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Rex Medical v. Intuitive Surgical (Fed. Cir., October 2, 2025) 2024-1072

This episode concerns a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding a patent infringement case, Rex Medical, L.P. v. Intuitive Surgical, Inc. The core issues addressed are damages, infringement, and patent validity of U.S. Patent No. 9,439,650, which relates to surgical stapling systems. The Federal Circuit ultimately affirmed the district court’s rulings, specifically upholding the exclusion of Rex Medical's damages expert testimony due to a failure to ...

1 month ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Focus Products Group v Kartri Sales (Fed. Cir., September 30, 2025) 2023-1446

This episode is about an opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, decided on September 30, 2025, concerning a complex intellectual property dispute between Focus Products Group International, LLC (and several related entities, collectively Appellees) and Kartri Sales Co., Inc. and Marquis Mills, International, Inc. (Appellants). The case centers on allegations that the Appellants infringed several utility patents, the HOOKLESS® trademark, the EZ ON trademark, a...

1 month ago

11 minutes

Condensed IP

Apex Bank v. CC Serve (Fed. Cir., September 25, 2025) 2023-2143

This episode concerns a decision from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The court opinion, Apex Bank v. CC Serve Corp., decided on September 25, 2025, addresses an appeal from the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board regarding the likelihood of confusion between the ASPIRE mark used by CC Serve and the proposed ASPIRE BANK marks of Apex Bank. The Federal Circuit affirmed-in-part, vacated-in-part, and remanded the case, specifically upholding the Board's finding of high s...

1 month ago

12 minutes

Condensed IP

Finesse Wireless v. AT&T Mobility (Fed. Cir., September 24, 2025) 2024-1039

This episode concerns an opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding the case of Finesse Wireless LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC and others. The court addresses an appeal by the defendants, AT&T and Nokia, against a district court's denial of Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) regarding the noninfringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,346,134 and 9,548,775, which relate to methods for mitigating intermodulation product interference in radios. The Federal Circu...

1 month ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Bayer v. Mylan (Fed. Cir., September 23, 2025) 2023-2434

This opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concerns a patent infringement appeal case, Bayer Pharma Aktiengesellschaft v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. The appeal concerns the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) final written decision holding claims of Bayer's U.S. Patent No. 10,828,310, which describes methods using rivaroxaban and aspirin to reduce cardiovascular risk, unpatentable. The Court affirms-in-part and vacates-in-part the PTAB's decision, specific...

1 month ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Magema Technology v. Phillips 66 (Fed. Cir., September 8, 2025) 2024-1342

This opinion concerns an appeal from a district court ruling in a patent infringement case between Magēmā Technology LLC and Phillips 66. Magēmā Technology, which holds a patent for desulfurizing heavy marine fuel oil (HMFO), sued Phillips 66 for infringement. The core issue on appeal concerns Phillips 66's improper and prejudicial argument at trial that ISO 8217 standards required actual testing data for fuel compliance, despite previously telling Magēmā that such testing was dangerous and e...

1 month ago

12 minutes

Condensed IP

Google v. Sonos (Fed. Cir., August 28, 2025) 2024-1097 non-precedential

This non-precedential decision concerns a patent dispute between Google LLC and Sonos, Inc. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reviewed a previous judgment from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. The appeal primarily addresses the validity and enforceability of several Sonos patents related to media playback systems, specifically the "Zone Scene" patents (U.S. Patent 10,469,966 and 10,848,885) and the "Direct Control" patent (U.S. Patent 1...

2 months ago

13 minutes

Condensed IP

Hyatt v. Stewart (Fed. Cir., August 29, 2025) 2018-2390, -2391, -2392, 2019-1038, -1039, -1049, -1070, 2024-1992, -1993, -1994, -1995

This judicial opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit details the ongoing litigation in the case of Gilbert P. Hyatt v. Coke Morgan Stewart, focusing on patent applications filed by Hyatt in the 1990s. The court addresses Hyatt's appeals concerning the affirmative defense of prosecution laches asserted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), and Hyatt's cross-appeals regarding the district court's lack of Article III jurisdiction over certain cl...

2 months ago

10 minutes

Condensed IP

Global Health Solutions v. Selner (Fed. Cir., August 26, 2025) 2023-2009

This opinion concerns an appeal before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in the case of Global Health Solutions LLC v. Marc Selner and was decided on August 26, 2025. The core issue revolves around a derivation proceeding under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of 2011 (AIA), which transitioned the U.S. patent system from "first-to-invent" to "first-inventor-to-file." Global Health Solutions (GHS) alleged that Selner, who filed his patent application first, derived ...

2 months ago

13 minutes

Condensed IP

In re Brunetti (Fed. Cir., August 26, 2025) 2023-1539

The opinion concerns an appeal by Erik Brunetti to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding the refusal to register the word "FUCK" as a trademark. The Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (Board) had previously affirmed the examining attorney's decision, citing that the word failed to function as a trademark because it is a widely-used, all-purpose expression that consumers would not perceive as a source identifier for goods and services. The Court of Appeals vacated ...

2 months ago

13 minutes

Condensed IP

Labcorp v. Qiagen (Fed. Cir., August 13, 2025) 2023-2350

This opinion concerns an appeal from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concerning a patent infringement case. The plaintiffs-appellees, including Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, successfully sued defendants-appellants Qiagen Sciences, LLC, for infringing their U.S. Patent 10,017,810 and U.S. Patent 10,450,597, which relate to methods for preparing DNA samples. The jury initially awarded damages to the plaintiffs; however, the Court of Appeals reversed the ...

2 months ago

13 minutes

Condensed IP

PowerBlock v. iFit (Fed. Cir., August 11, 2025) 2024-1177

This is an opinion from the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit regarding the case of PowerBlock Holdings, Inc. v. iFit, Inc. The core issue revolves around the patent eligibility of PowerBlock's U.S. Patent No. 7,578,771, which pertains to selectorized dumbbells with automated weight adjustment. The Court of Appeals reversed the district court's decision, which had found most claims of the patent to be ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they were deemed "abstract ide...

2 months ago

12 minutes