Peter Elliott Heuser Attorney

Portland, US
Practice Areas: Patent Litigation, Patent Prosecution...
(503) ???-???? (Login to view more)


Core Wireless v. LG affirms the denial of summary judgment as to unpatentable subject matter, ruling that the asserted claims are directed to an improved user... Read More »
In the sole precedential patent case decided this week, Flexuspine v. Globus, the Circuit affirms rulings of the district court relating to verdict forms where the... Read More »
The Supreme Court is taking another patent case, granting certiorari in WesternGeco v. Ion. A divided panel of the Circuit had ruled that the plaintiff was not... Read More »
The big news yesterday was the Circuit’s en banc decision in Wi-Fi  One v. Broadcom in which a majority of the court holds that, given the strong... Read More »
In both HTC v. Cellular and Microsoft v. Biscotti, the Circuit affirms rare IPR determinations that all of the claims of the patents at issue are not invalid. In... Read More »
Arctic Cat v. Bombardier deals with obviousness, patent marking, reasonable royalties, willfulness and enhanced damages. The panel affirms all of the district... Read More »
We do not usually report on district court cases, but the Columbia Sportswear v. Seirus design patent case handled by our firm is particularly interesting, given the... Read More »
.In the Micron Tech case, the Circuit rules that TC Heartland changed the law on patent venue such that Micron’s argument of improper venue is now much easier... Read More »
In Sanofi v. Watson Labs., the Circuit affirms a determination of induced infringement of one patent and direct infringement of another, thus assuring Sanofi another... Read More »
In Bayer v. Watson, the panel throws out Bayer’s patent to its Staxyn erectile dysfunction drug as being obvious, noting that the district court focused too... Read More »