The judicially-derived patent-law doctrine of “assignor estoppel” prevents an inventor from assigning a patent to another for value and then later arguing in litigation that the patent is invalid. In Minerva Surgical Inc. v....more
The Constitution’s Article II “Appointments Clause” requires the President, with the advice and consent of the Senate, to appoint “officers” of the United States. In United States v. Arthrex, Inc., the Supreme Court reviewed...more
6/24/2021
/ Administrative Patent Judges ,
Appointments Clause ,
Arthrex Inc v Smith & Nephew Inc ,
Executive Branch ,
Executive Powers ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
United States v Arthrex Inc ,
USPTO
On Friday, June 22, 2018, in WesternGeco LLC v. Ion Geophysical Corp., No. 16-1011, the U.S. Supreme Court held that damages awards for infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(f)(2) may include foreign lost profits. The ruling will...more
6/27/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(2) ,
35 U.S.C. § 284 ,
Appeals ,
Damages ,
Domestic Injury ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Foreign Sales ,
Lost Profits ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Vacated ,
WesternGeco LLC v Ion Geophysical Corporation
The Supreme Court recently handed down two highly anticipated decisions concerning inter partes review (IPR) challenge proceedings in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s...more
The Supreme Court on May 22, 2017 issued its highly anticipated decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Brands Group LLC, regarding the proper interpretation of the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b). In a unanimous...more