Patents

Nutter achieved a significant win for its client Intergraph Corporation. Intergraph invented a distinct graphic for the on-screen display of its software product and engaged Tom Tuytschaevers to obtain a “design” patent for the graphic. A design patent is a patent that grants ownership to the ornamental design of a product. The Examiner at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“U.S.P.T.O.”) rejected Intergraph’s application based on the Examiner’s erroneous interpretation of the statute and a U.S.P.T.O. precedential decision. Tom persevered through a multi-year battle with the U.S.P.T.O., including a successful appeal to the U.S.P.T.O.’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”). Tom researched the evolution of the U.S.P.T.O.’s standards for design patents, briefed the appeal, and represented Intergraph at oral arguments before the Board, ultimately convincing them to rule in Intergraph’s favor. The Board’s decision clarifies the U.S.P.T.O.’s design patent standards and holds the potential to change the way the U.S.P.T.O. examines design patent applications for computer displays.

Nutter drafted an amicus brief to the Massachusetts SJC on behalf of a patent law association in a case involving subject matter conflict-of-interest issues in patent prosecution.

Nutter advised a life sciences company that was accused by a competitor of patent infringement relating to an insertion method for a hemodialysis catheter. After briefing and a hearing, the court disposed of the case on summary judgment, finding the patent-in-suit obvious as a matter of law.

Nutter defended Lallemand Specialties, Inc. and its affiliate in 2018 jury trial during which a competitor alleged Lallemand infringed a patent directed to transgenic yeast. The parties ultimately entered into a mutually-beneficial joint agreement, which includes a license to the patent-in-suit.

Nutter represented a startup speech recognition technology company defending numerous simultaneous lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions in a momentous patent war with a much larger rival company. Through Nutter’s efforts, the client was able to achieve a global settlement on very favorable terms.

Nutter represented a company in several jurisdictions in related patent and trademark actions concerning the manufacture, sale, and marketing of feminine hygiene products. The client and its competitor resolved the cases globally on terms favorable to our client.

Nutter represented a plaintiff in a patent infringement suit related to an ingestible bait poison for molluscs, including snails and slugs, against manufacturer and seller of organic and biodegradable pesticides. The case was settled just as discovery was about to commence.

Nutter negotiated an early settlement of a patent infringement suit whereby the client agreed to re-design its product. The case was dismissed with no payment of damages.

Nutter defended a producer of genetically modified organisms used in ethanol production in a jury trial during which a competitor alleged infringement of a patent directed to transgenic yeast. The parties ultimately entered into a mutually-beneficial joint agreement, which includes a license to the patent-in-suit.

Nutter represented a company that designs and sells a GPS-based pet containment and tracking collar in asserting multiple patents against a competitor (who brought counterclaims relating to, among other things, alleged false marketing statements). Litigation spanned district court and PTAB (IPR proceedings). Nutter obtained a favorable claim construction ruling and numerous discovery-related rulings. Nutter’s IP Litigation team completed fact and expert discovery and obtained key concessions from witnesses. Within a few months of trial, the court granted our motion to expand infringement allegations to allow the assertion of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents. Shortly thereafter, the case settled favorably.

Nutter represented a company that designed and sells reusable smart notebooks in patent litigation against Chinese companies attempting to enter the U.S. market with infringing products by filing a declaratory judgment action of non-infringement. The firm constructed a strong infringement argument and convinced declaratory judgment plaintiffs to dismiss the case before the client had to file an answer or spend significant money.