The online auctioneer eBay is being sued for $3.8m over six alleged patent infringements and breaking a confidentiality agreement relating to its PayPal payment service.

According to Reuters, XPRT Ventures claims that eBay incorporated information shared in confidence into the "PayPal Buyer Credit" and "Pay Later" services, and used it in a 2003 patent application.

"This involves a trade secret theft, along with sheer patent infringement," said Steven Moore, a partner at Kelley Drye & Warren LLP representing the plaintiff. "It is bad enough to take someone's technology, but it is a bit much to use it in your own patent application."

The payments division of eBay generated $2.8bn in 2009, 32% of their $8.73bn total for the year. XPRT seems to be looking for a chunk of this, seeking a minimum of $3.8bn in monetary damages. It is also seeking treble damages resulting from eBay's alleged "willful and malicious conduct", punitive damages, among other claims.

Much like Facebook in the case brought by Paul Ceglia that we reported yesterday, eBay dismissed the complaint as "without merit". A spokeswoman said: "We intend to defend ourselves vigorously."

A federal judge on Monday struck down patents on two genes linked to breast and ovarian cancer. The decision, if upheld, could throw into doubt the patents covering thousands of human genes and reshape the law of intellectual property

United States District Court Judge Robert W. Sweet issued the 152-page decision, which invalidated seven patents related to the genes BRCA1 and BRCA2, whose mutations have been associated with cancer.

The American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law in New York joined with individual patients and medical organizations to challenge the patents last May: they argued that genes, products of nature, fall outside of the realm of things that can be patented. The patents, they argued, stifle research and innovation and limit testing options.

Myriad Genetics, the company that holds the patents with the University of Utah Research Foundation, asked the court to dismiss the case, claiming that the work of isolating the DNA from the body transforms it and makes it patentable. Such patents, it said, have been granted for decades; the Supreme Court upheld patents on living organisms in 1980. In fact, many in the patent field had predicted the courts would throw out the suit.

A federal appeals court denied on Thursday Microsoft Corp's request that a full panel of judges rehear arguments in its long-running patent dispute with a small Canadian technology company.

The decision is a blow to the world's largest software maker, which has been embroiled in a dispute with Toronto-based i4i Ltd over a feature in Microsoft's Word application for more than three years.

Microsoft could yet take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court, or make a new request to the appeals court. The company is considering its options, according to a spokesman.

A federal jury awarded i4i $290 million last August after finding that Microsoft had infringed a patent belonging to i4i relating to text manipulation software in the 2003 and 2007 versions of Word, Microsoft's word processing application.

A jury has awarded communications company VirnetX Holding nearly $106 million after determining Microsoft violated two of its patents.

The verdict came Tuesday after a weeklong trial in U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.

Lawyers for VirnetX, which is based in Scotts Valley, say the $105.75 million verdict was $71.75 million for infringing one patent, and $34 million for infringing another.

The patents cover ways to establish virtual private network, or VPN, connections, which are used to protect Internet and other data traffic from snoops. The traffic is generally encrypted, or scrambled so outsiders can't decipher it.

Microsoft says it is disappointed by the jury's verdict and that it believes it didn't infringe the patents. It says it will appeal.

Apple on Tuesday asked the U.S. International Trade Commission to block the importation into the country of HTC's Google Android-based mobile phones, including the Google-branded Nexus One.

Apple asked the court for "a permanent exclusion order" that would bar from entry "all mobile communications devices and components" made by HTC that carry the offending technologies, according to court documents.

Apple on Tuesday sued HTC for alleged, multiple patent violations, claiming the Taiwan-based manufacturer's products infringe on its iPhone technology. Apple filed the actions with the ITC and the U.S. District Court for Delaware.

In the ITC filing, Apple says 11 HTC phones violate its patents, including the Nexus One, Touch Pro, Touch Diamond, Pure, Imagio, and myTouch 3G. Apple claims HTC infringed on a total of 20 patents governing a range of technologies.

Apple wants the ITC to block HTC and its partners from "importing, marketing, advertising, demonstrating, warehousing inventory for distribution, distributing, offering for sale" any of the listed phones.

Apple is also seeking unspecified monetary damages in the Delaware court.

After further review, the U.S. Patent and Trademark review board's decision stands.

A federal appeals court rejected South Carolina's petition to use the letters "USC" on the Fighting Gamecocks baseball team's uniforms. The decision upholds the Patent and Trademark Office board's ruling regarding the University of Southern California's claim to the logo.

Scott Edelman, an attorney representing USC, -- the LA USC -- said the ruling protects the school's "primary athletic mark." He said the logo, used on team clothing and equipment, brings in significant revenue.

Nobody would confuse a Trojan for a Gamecock, but he said people might mistake South Carolina merchandise for Trojan merchandise if the garnet-and-black of South Carolina and the cardinal-and-gold of Southern California both carried the same "USC" logo.

Microsoft on Friday mounted a last-ditch effort to get a U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals to reconsider its ruling in a long-running patent infringement case involving its Word software.
Last month, the court denied Microsoft's appeal of an injunction in the case involving Toronto-based firm i4i, which last year won a $200 million court case against Microsoft pertaining to technology built into Word 2007 and Office 2007 that's used to customize XML code. That figure has since grown to $290 million in interest and fines levied by judge on the grounds of "intentional infringement."

The i4i patent describes a way to manipulate the architecture and content of a document, particularly for data representation and transformation, by removing dependency on document-encoding technology.

After last month's ruling, Microsoft said it would remove the disputed feature from new copies of Word 2007 and Office 2007 and have them ready for sale in time for the court ordered Jan. 11 deadline. Nonetheless, Microsoft has insisted all along that it's not guilty of infringement and is taking one last stab at getting the judge to see things its way.