IP|Trend: The Importance of Consumer Surveys in Patent Litigation
Post-Grant Insights: The Need for Seamless Coordination of District Court & PTAB Litigation
IP|Trend: Inter Partes Review: Is it Litigation or Something Else?
Post-Grant Insights: The Preparation and Pace of the PTAB
2014 IP Record Shows Continued Growth for Design Patent Filings
Controlling the Cost of Patent Litigation
Post-Grant Insights: The Impact of PTAB Appeals on the Federal Circuit
.bit: Why Brands Need to Pay Attention
Post-Grant Insights: Key Considerations in PTAB Oral Hearings
Post-Grant Insights: What claims to include in your PTAB petition
Polsinelli Podcasts - Removing Caps on Punitive Damages: What is the Impact on Business?
IP|Trend: Dust up After the Breach
Thinking Compliance When Protecting Your Ideas Internationally
What are the Implications of Alice v. CLS?
Protecting Trade Secrets During Business Collaboration
IP|Trend: Inter Partes Review: Is It Still Right For You?
IS THE A IN ANDA BEGINNING TO MEAN ANTITRUST?
What Does the Supreme Court Ruling in Alice v. CLS Mean to a Software Entrepreneur?
Bill Beutler on Editing Wikipedia
Inter Partes Review Appeals: What You Need to Know
Just because an expert says something is so doesn't mean that it is. That's the lesson of Judge Gale's ruling last week in Carter v. Clements Walker. He rejected the evidentiary value of an expert's report stating that...more
Clearly, client-driven litigation and malpractice complaints against patent practitioners are not decreasing any time soon. During the investigation surrounding the suit or complaint, the actions or inactions of the patent...more
Today has been an interesting day for the “Why Lawyers Suck and What You Can Do About It” book project. First thing this morning I got a phone call from someone passionately supportive of this project and everything it...more
For nearly two decades, the Federal Circuit has applied a lenient standard for federal jurisdiction that routinely sweeps state law claims into the exclusive jurisdiction of the federal courts merely because the claims...more
In an opinion and order dated May 7, 2013, the Honorable Mitchell S. Goldberg of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction a legal malpractice action...more
In This Issue:
• State Courts Should Handle Patent Malpractice Cases
• “A” and “An” in Claims Mean “One or More”
• No Direct Infringer Needs to be Identified in Declaratory Judgment Jurisdiction Over Indirect...more
As experienced trial lawyers know, successfully trying or defending a case is all about presenting a compelling, understandable theme and narrative that comports with a judge and jury’s common sense and experience....more
The Supreme Court of the United States, in Gunn v. Minton, determined that a Texas state court had jurisdiction over a legal malpractice claim, even though resolving the claim required the state court to address an issue of...more
On February 20, 2013, the Supreme Court issued its opinion in the case of Gunn v. Minton. The heart of this matter is whether the state-based malpractice action based upon an underlying patent infringement lawsuit may be...more
In the course of deciding that malpractice cases against patent lawyers belong in state courts (when there is no diversity of citizenship), the United States Supreme Court has issued an important ruling on the scope of...more
On February 20, 2013, the Supreme Court issued a decision addressing the critical question of where plaintiffs can or must sue when their claims implicate patent law but are not traditional patent law claims. See Gunn v....more
A patent issue exerted its Circe-like effect on the Supreme Court again today in Gunn v. Minton, a decision overruling the Texas Supreme Court on the question of whether the existence of a patent issue in a legal malpractice...more
On January 16, 2013, the Supreme Court of the United States heard oral arguments in Gunn. The heart of the matter is whether the state-based malpractice action may be heard in state court or whether it must be heard in...more
Earlier we reported on both the U.S. Supreme Court's grant of certiorari in the Gunn v. Minton case decided by the Supreme Court of Texas and the submission of Petitioner's and several supporting amicus curiae briefs. Gunn is...more
Earlier this year we reported on the granting of certiorari for the case of Gunn v. Minton from the Supreme Court of Texas. The case involves a claim of attorney malpractice in an underlying patent litigation matter. The...more
On Friday, October 5, 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Gunn v. Minton, seeking to address whether the Federal Circuit and other courts following its lead have departed from the Supreme Court's "arising...more
During past month when many patent practitioners may have been distracted by the “laws of nature” meaning of the Mayo v. Prometheus decision, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued four precedential rulings...more
The Federal Circuit has issued a decision addressing the application of the California doctrine of equitable tolling in the context of a legal malpractice case.
The full Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has confirmed that where the outcome of a legal malpractice case turns on federal patent law, federal jurisdiction exists. Even though a claim arises under state law, it may...more
What happens when a start-up company (Protostorm) retains a sole practitioner to prepare provisional patent applications, another solo lawyer to prepare the corresponding U.S. non-provisional application, and yet another firm...more
Over four years have elapsed since the Federal Circuit first held that federal courts possess exclusive jurisdiction over patent legal malpractice claims. In Immunocept, LLC v. Fulbright & Jaworski, LLP, 504...more
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California recently ruled that a patent legal malpractice plaintiff was not judicially estopped from re-filing its lawsuit in federal court after initially filing it in...more
In an unpublished opinion, the United States District Court for the Northern District of California has held that a client’s fraud claim against its former attorneys was barred by the three year limitation period set forth in...more
The United States District Court for the Eastern District of California issued a ruling on January 20, 2011 concluding that a legal malpractice action alleging negligent prosecution of a patent fell within the court’s...more
Legal malpractice defense attorneys often prefer to defend malpractice cases in federal court rather than state court. Reasons for this vary, but federal judges sometimes are perceived to be more willing than state court...more
Find an Intellectual Property Author »
Back to Top