On June 22, 2018, the US Supreme Court clarified the scope of permissible patent damages awards by holding that when a party is found liable under
35 U.S.C. § 271(f) for exporting components of a patented invention, foreign...more
6/26/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(2) ,
Appeals ,
Component Parts Doctrine ,
Damages ,
Domestic Injury ,
Exports ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Foreign Profits ,
Foreign Sales ,
Lost Profits ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
WesternGeco LLC v Ion Geophysical Corporation
On May 22, 2017, the Supreme Court fundamentally narrowed patent venue by unanimously holding in TC Heartland that patent holders must follow the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b), which requires suing (1) “where the...more
On April 24, 2018, the US Supreme Court decided two important cases that directly impact inter partes reviews (IPRs) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), and patent litigation as a whole. In Oil States Energy...more
4/30/2018
/ Administrative Proceedings ,
America Invents Act ,
Article III ,
Chevron Deference ,
Constitutional Challenges ,
Estoppel ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Oil States Energy Services v Greene's Energy Group ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Ownership ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Public Rights Doctrine ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
SCOTUS ,
Seventh Amendment ,
USPTO
On October 4, 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a divided en banc decision in Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal, vacating the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) final written decision insofar as it...more
On September 21, 2017, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in In re Cray, Inc. clarified the rules for determining proper venue in patent suits, building on the US Supreme Court’s May 2017 ruling in TC Heartland...more
When the US Supreme Court decision in TC Heartland was published, many patent practitioners thought that the decision would adversely affect the Eastern District of Texas, a popular venue for patentees because of its quick...more
7/13/2017
/ Corporate Counsel ,
Forum Shopping ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Principal Place of Business ,
Raytheon ,
SCOTUS ,
State of Incorporation ,
TC Heartland LLC v Kraft Foods ,
Venue
As we implement the Eversheds Sutherland combination and expand our ability to serve clients around the globe, our US and international teams are working together to analyze issues impacting clients doing business in multiple...more
6/21/2017
/ America Invents Act ,
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ,
Anti-Money Laundering ,
Attorney-Client Privilege ,
Cross-Border ,
Enforcement Actions ,
EU ,
Legal Advice Privilege ,
Patent Litigation ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Privileged Communication ,
Tax Reform ,
UK ,
Website Accessibility
On May 22, 2017, the US Supreme Court unanimously rejected prior case law allowing patent holders to rely on the general venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c), to file suit where a domestic defendant makes sales. TC Heartland,...more
5/24/2017
/ Domestic Corporations ,
Foreign Corporations ,
Forum Shopping ,
Non-Practicing Entities ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Principal Place of Business ,
SCOTUS ,
TC Heartland LLC v Kraft Foods ,
Venue
On February 21, in Secure Axcess, LLC v. PNC Bank Nat’l. Assoc’n, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) characterization of Axcess’s patent as a covered business...more
On June 20, the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee, 2016 WL 3369425 (June 20, 2016) upheld the Patent Office’s long-held policy of construing a patent claim according to its broadest...more
6/22/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Broadest Reasonable Interpretation Standard ,
Chevron Deference ,
Chevron v NRDC ,
Claim Construction ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
SCOTUS ,
USPTO
On June 13, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Federal Circuit’s rigid two-part test for awarding enhanced damages in patent cases. In two cases decided together, Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., and...more
6/15/2016
/ 35 U.S.C. § 284 ,
Enhanced Damages ,
Halo v Pulse ,
Judicial Discretion ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Preponderance of the Evidence ,
SCOTUS ,
Seagate ,
Stryker v Zimmer ,
Willful Infringement
On January 20, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, rejected the de novo review standard applied by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit when reviewing all claim construction...more
1/22/2015
/ Claim Construction ,
Clear Error Standard ,
De Novo Standard of Review ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pharmaceutical Industry ,
Prescription Drugs ,
SCOTUS ,
Standard of Review ,
Teva Pharmaceuticals ,
Teva v Sandoz
On June 2, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held in Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments Inc. that a patent claim may be found indefinite if it fails to convey the scope of the invention “with reasonable certainty” to a person...more
On June 2, 2014, a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court held in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. that direct infringement by a single party is a prerequisite to a finding of induced infringement. In doing so, the...more
Efforts by the U.S. Senate to pass an alternative to the Innovation Act, which aims to reform abusive patent litigation, have stalled. Sen. Patrick Leahy, who is leading the effort, has announced that his committee is tabling...more
5/26/2014
/ Apple ,
Attorney's Fees ,
DuPont ,
Federal Trade Commission (FTC) ,
Fee-Shifting ,
Ford Motor ,
General Electric ,
Highmark ,
Highmark v. Allcare ,
IBM ,
Innovation Act ,
Medtronic ,
Microsoft ,
Octane Fitness v. ICON ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Reform ,
Patent Trolls ,
Patents ,
Pfizer ,
USPTO
In twin unanimous opinions issued yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court has rejected long-standing Federal Circuit rules governing the award of attorneys’ fees to the prevailing party in patent litigation, and appellate review of...more