Intellectual Property Civil Procedure

Read Intellectual Property Law updates, alerts, news, and legal analysis from leading lawyers and law firms:
News & Analysis as of

First One Gets Away from Bass-Backed Group

Many in the pharmaceutical industry have been concerned about becoming a target of the Coalition for Affordable Drugs, the group backed by hedge fund manager Kyle Bass. But yesterday the first target of Bass’s strategy,...more

Is One APJ Enough For Post Grant Institution Decisions?

A pilot program proposed by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office would have a single Administrative Patent Judge (APJ), as opposed to a panel of three, decide whether to institute trial in a post grant patent proceeding, such...more

New EU Trade Mark Regime to address ECJ's Decision in IP Translator

The European Court of Justice’s June 2012 decision in IP TRANSLATOR changed the way trade mark specifications are interpreted. OHIM’s application of this decision led to inconsistent interpretations of trade mark...more

Attorney Fees for Post-Grant Patent Challenge Proceedings Before the USPTO May Be Recoverable in Exceptional Cases Under 35 U.S.C....

Parties accused of patent infringement are turning more and more to post-grant challenge proceedings at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) as a faster and cheaper means for invalidating the asserted...more

PTAB Denies Institution of Kyle Bass's Ampyra Patent Challenge

The USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has put an end to Kyle Bass’s Ampyra patent challenge, by denying institution of Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings. While many were hoping the PTAB would render a decision...more

Celgene’s Pending Sanctions Motions against Kyle Bass’s Hedge Fund

The Patent Trial and Appeals Board (PTAB) previously authorized Celgene Corporation (“Celgene”) to move for sanctions against the Coalition for Affordable Drugs (“Coalition”), an entity affiliated with a Kyle Bass hedge fund...more

August 2015: Trademark/Copyright Litigation Update

Federal Circuit Invalidates Apple’s iPhone Trade Dresses as Functional. On May 18, 2015, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a judgment of the Northern District of California that Samsung had diluted Apple’s...more

Supreme Court Corner – Q3 2015

In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, the Supreme Court upheld a long-standing precedent that restricts the ability of a patent holder to charge a royalty beyond the term of a patent. In a 6-3 decision, the Court declined to...more

Patent Board’s Proposed New Rules for PTAB Trials

The PTAB issues its second round of proposed rule changes. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) just issued its second round of proposed rule changes to post-patent issuance review proceedings (Inter Partes Reviews,...more

July 2015 Update on Subject Matter Eligibility

On July 30, 2015, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office updated its subject matter eligibility guidance ("Eligibility Update"). This update provides recommendations and resources for examiners in addition to those in the...more

B&B Hardware v. Hargis – What it Means and How it will Affect TTAB Litigation

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a decision that may significantly impact how Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (“TTAB”) cases are litigated and whether potential litigants elect to forego TTAB litigation in certain...more

Standard-essential Patents and the RAND Requirement: Recent Decisions on Reasonable and Nondiscriminatory Royalties

Issues related to standard-essential patents (SEPs) have generated significant attention in the wake of the first appellate decisions on royalties for SEPs – Ericsson, Inc. v. D-Link Systems. 773 F.3d 1201 (Fed. Cir. 2014)...more

Sequenom’s En Banc Petition

For any of us practitioners encountering increasing numbers of s. 101 rejection rejections of diagnostic claims based on Mayo and the March 2014 PTO Guidance – and that is pretty much any life sciences patent attorney – this...more

Fed. Cir. Rules Requirements for Direct Infringement by Multiple Parties

In Akami Technologies v. Limelight Networks, App. No. 2009-1372, -1380, -1416, -1417 (Fed. Cir., August 13, 2015), the court, sitting en banc after a remand from the S. Ct., set out the requirements for direct infringement...more

Enovsys v. AT&T: Court Excludes Plaintiff's Damage Expert for Failure to Apportion and Sua Sponte Bifurcates Trial into Liability...

After the court struck plaintiff's damage expert's report for failing to tie damages to the limited feature of the patented invention, the court permitted the plaintiff to submit a supplemental expert report. Once the...more

Post-Grant Proceedings: The Top Seven Things You Should Know About the Proposed Rule Changes

On August 20th, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published proposed rules that would amend the consolidated set of rules currently governing Inter Partes Reviews, Post-Grant Reviews, Covered Business Method Reviews, and...more

Favoring a Holistic Approach, the Federal Circuit Overturns TTAB Decision to Refuse Paw Print Logo

Last week, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reviewed a TTAB decision that had refused outdoor apparel company Jack Wolfskin’s application to register its paw print logo. Jack Wolfskin Ausrustung fur...more

Court Dismisses City’s Copyright Claim Against Critic for Using Council Meeting Clips in YouTube Videos

A California city cannot hold one of its citizens liable for copyright infringement for using clips of city council meetings in his critical YouTube videos, a federal judge has ruled. The August 20, 2015, Order in City of...more

PTAB Denies Inter Partes Review Petitions Against Two Acorda Patents

One of the statistics gleaned from Director Michelle Lee's recent blog on the post-issuance review provisions of the America Invents Act is that only 42% of inter partes review petitions have been granted over the past three...more

Court Report - August 2015 #3

About Court Report: Each week we will report briefly on recently filed biotech and pharma cases. Reckitt Benckiser LLC v. Dr. Reddys Laboratories, Inc. et al. 1:15-cv-04524; filed June 26, 2015 in the District Court of...more

First Federal Register Notice of BPCIA Suit

Yesterday, FDA published notice of Janssen’s lawsuit against Celltrion and Hospira on March 6, 2015 under the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) in the Federal Register. Although Janssen’s lawsuit...more

Court Orders Fee Award for Defendants in Patent Case, Using New Octane Fitness Standard

On August 19, Chief Judge Petrese Tucker of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania issued an opinion awarding more than $6.5 million in attorneys’ fees to two defendant corporations who prevailed at...more

Know Them Before They are Famous (or at least final): The Latest USPTO Proposed Rule Changes

On August 19, 2015, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released proposed rule changes for trials before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The proposed rule changes were made in response to input...more

Can an Attorneys’ Fee Award Include IPR Fees?

In Deep Sky Software, Inc., v. Southwest Airlines Co., 10-cv-1234-CAB (S.D. Cal. August 19, 2015), Southwest sought $359,733.17 in attorneys’ under fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 after Deep Sky’s U.S. Patent No. 6,738,770 was...more

Board Dismisses Petition for Failure to Name All Real Parties-In-Interest

Patent Owners get frustrated when they believe a petition fails to identify all real parties-in-interest. This is understandable, given the difficulties in obtaining additional discovery on the issue. However, sometimes...more

6,251 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 251

Follow Intellectual Property Updates on:

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×