Implementers of standard essential patents (SEPs) continue to hold out in patent licensing discussions with SEP owners, including pursuing the cynical strategy of seeking anti-suit injunctions (ASIs). This failed strategy is...more
Innovators have long insisted that licensing discussions over standard essential patents (SEP) are one sided: implementers often “hold out” in bad faith by delaying discussions for as long as possible. The theory driving this...more
A frequent issue seen within patent litigation is whether serving a complaint satisfies the knowledge requirement for post-complaint indirect infringement. This issue affects the amount of, if any, damages a patent owner can...more
Starting a high-tech company is a difficult, exhausting, and thrilling endeavor – one in which founders will face seemingly endless challenges, deadlines, and make or break decisions. From a venture’s inception, founders face...more
3/1/2023
/ Capital Raising ,
Copyright ,
Early Stage Companies ,
Entrepreneurs ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Non-Disclosure Agreement ,
Open Source Software ,
Patents ,
Startups ,
Technology Sector ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
The UK has again demonstrated the ongoing trend against hold-out, approving an order forcing Apple to commit to take a license on FRAND terms, to be determined by the court, or face an injunction. This ruling is the latest in...more
Avanci’s pool retains its 5th Circuit win, in a slightly different way, after an unusual turn of events where the panel rescinded its prior opinion and issued a new one. The new opinion affirms the district court’s ruling...more
On June 8, 2022, the DOJ, USPTO, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (collectively, the Agencies) issued a new statement on FRAND licensing (2022 Statement) providing no set policy regarding...more
The Fifth Circuit recently ratified the right of holders of standard essential patents (“SEP”) to choose where in the supply chain to license SEPs and dealt a blow to the “hold up” narrative advanced by some implementers. In...more
Patent owners that lack sufficient resources are often required to utilize the services of an outside litigation funding source to vindicate their patent rights. Often times, these patent owners communicate with such...more
The Federal Circuit recently provided strategic guidance for defending software claims against Alice challenges that claims recite ineligible patent subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In Mentone Solutions LLC v. Digi...more
The DOJ is requesting public comment on a new draft policy concerning licensing negotiations and remedies for standards-essential patents (SEPs) subject to voluntary F/RAND commitments recently jointly issued by the U.S....more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently thwarted an attempt by big tech companies such as Apple, Cisco, Google, and Intel, to rid themselves of discretionary denials under the Fintiv factors. While these...more
Recent developments indicate that the UK is a favorable jurisdiction that owners of standard essential patents (“SEP”) can leverage to obtain appropriate SEP rates from what would otherwise be unwilling licensees. ...more
A recent decision by a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) panel in Canadian Solar Inc., et al v. The Solaria Corporation may have opened the door for aggrieved parties to seek rehearing for any reason, rather than the...more
Patent owners searching for an appropriate venue for cases against alleged infringers may be able to point to the activity of an infringer’s agents, based on a new decision from the Eastern District of Texas. In recommending...more
The United States FRAND jurisprudence had a recent watershed moment in a decision that is sure to reverberate through the standard essential patent (SEP) world, and specifically SEP litigation in the United States. Earlier...more
In earlier blogs, we discussed when to amend and when not to amend claims in an inter partes review (“IPR”) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 316(d)(1). Below are guidelines on the procedural aspects of filing a motion to amend...more
The Federal Circuit recently found that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) violates a patent owner’s procedural rights under the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) when construing a disputed claim term by omitting...more
On Monday, the Supreme Court denied TCL Communication’s certiorari petition, without comment, appealing the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the essentiality of a patent claim is a question for the jury rather than judges to...more
When confronted with instituted IPRs, Patent Owners should identify and exploit issues that the Petition glossed over and bring those to the attention of the Board. This will highlight for the Board important issues that the...more
Over the last decade, patent litigation has exploded at the International Trade Commission (“ITC”), which has caused the ITC to seek out ways to increase efficiency. Several years ago, the ITC introduced an early 100-Day...more
The right expert can be the critical piece that saves the validity of your patent. Finding the right expert for a patent owner requires careful selection and due diligence. We previously detailed how your expert’s testimony...more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently grappled with the admission into evidence of expert deposition testimony that was presumably harmful to the petitioner in an inter partes...more
Arguing against material constructions proffered by an IPR petition is a basic building block of the patent owner’s preliminary response. Obviously, patent owners must investigate and advocate for claim constructions for...more
Building on Tip #4, one effective way to avoid institution and not address facts is to point out shortcomings in the petition's application of KSR when asserting motivation to combine for an obviousness analysis. The Patent...more
11/13/2020
/ Claim Construction ,
Claim Limitations ,
Denial of Institution ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
POSITA ,
Prior Art