Inter-Partes Review of Patents: The Case So Far (CLE)
IP|Trend: Starting Up Your Protection of Intellectual Property
IP|Trend: New Era in Protection of Software by Intellectual Property Law?
IP|Trend: Ensuring an Environment of Compliance
IP|Trend: It’s Time to Get to Know the Federal Trade Commission
IP | Trend: Data in the Cloud is the Next Big Storm?
Inter Partes Review: Validity Before the PTAB
The Era of Generic Biologic Drugs Has Officially Begun: An Update on U.S. Biosimilars
IP|Trend: Keeping Your Start-Up Compliant
IP|Trend: Discovering Source Code
Ropes & Gray: Advantages of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Settlement and Termination in IPR Proceedings: What You Need to Know
IP|Trend: Music to IP Lawyers Ears: What Lawyers Can Learn From Musicians
Post-Grant Insights: The Significance of a Three-Judge Panel
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
BNB Health Grades, Inc. ("Health Grades") filed a patent infringement action against MDx Medical, Inc., d/b/a Vitals.com ("MDx"). During the litigation, Health Grades identified licensing agreements and associated systems...more
Venture Corp. v. Barrett, 2014 WL 5305575 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 16, 2014).
In this patent case, the defendant moved to compel identifying information after the parties reached an impasse regarding how responsive information...more
The defendants in this patent infringement action sought the production of certain billing statements of the law firm representing CleanTech. The defendants argued that the billing statements were discoverable based on their...more
Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coast Sys., 2014 WL 5321095 (N.D. Cal. Oct. 17, 2014).
In this patent infringement case, the plaintiff company moved the court to compel the defendant to produce archival emails from eight...more
Countless parties to inter partes review can tell you how to lose a Motion for Additional Discovery. This is especially so for discovery motions seeking evidence to prove privity between the Petitioner and a third party in an...more
After plaintiff, McAirlaids, requested the deposition of one of Kimberly-Clark's ("K-C") in-house litigation counsel, K-C filed a motion for a protective order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(c) to preclude the deposition of...more
Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd v. Enplas Corporation, IPR2014-00605, Paper 17, (November 5, 2014), the Board denied patent owners motion for additional discovery which exceeded the scope of the Board’s authorization. The...more
In General Electric Co. v. Transdata, Inc., the patent owner requested authorization to file a motion for leave to take discovery of petitioner General Electric regarding whether GE is in privity with a defendant in...more
Apple Inc. v. Samsung, 2014 WL 4745933 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 19, 2014).
In this intellectual property case, the plaintiff sought to recover around $1.5 million in costs for producing documents to an online hosted...more
Garmin Int’l, Inc., et al. v. Cuozzo Speed Technologies LLC; Idle Free Systems, Inc. v. Bergstrom, Inc. -
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board) recently designated as “informative” two decisions earlier released...more
In Seoul Semiconductor Co., Ltd. v. Enplas Corporation, IPR2014-00605, Paper 13 (October 16, 2014), the Board authorized the Patent Owner to move for additional discovery about testing that Petitioner conducted. ...more
In this patent infringement action brought by Trustees of Boston University ("BU"), BU alleged that defendants infringed U.S. Patent No. 5,686,738 (the "'738 Patent"), which centers on light emitting diodes ("LEDs") and the...more
Melian Labs, Inc. v. Triology LLC, No. 13-cv-04791-SBA, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 124343 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 4, 2014).
In this trademark dispute, the plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment that its website did not infringe...more
Boston Scientific Corp. v. Lee, No. 2041 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 107584 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 4, 2014).
In this intellectual property case, the plaintiff corporation alleged that the defendant’s employment with another company...more
As this patent infringement action headed to trial, the district court scolded both parties for their exhibit lists and, in particular, the objections to the exhibit lists. The district court explained that "Affinity has...more
Plaintiff Deckers Outdoor Corporation ("Plaintiff") alleged that Defendants Superstar International, Inc. and Sai Liu ("Defendants") produce, advertise, and sell products that infringe Plaintiff's design patents for UGG...more
On August 22, 2014, the Texas Supreme Court ordered oral argument in In re: Magnum Hunter Resources Corp., a case concerning the discoverability of third-party trade secrets documents in civil cases. When should such...more
August 28, 2014 – The PTAB continues to take a hard line on motions for additional discovery, but shows a willingness to grant some limited additional discovery, as the following four decisions illustrate...more
Two software companies wanted to integrate their software products. The relationship soured and one of the parties - McHenry - purported to terminate the Software Licensing and Development Agreement and then launched a...more
In This Issue:
- Main Article:
..Ninth Circuit Shifts “Significant Expense” of Compliance with Third Party Subpoenas to Party Seeking Discovery
- Noted With Interest:
..Delaware Court Finds Password...more
Saying, “[t]here is no way the court would ever order 5000+ custodians to be searched (on this record),” Judge Forrest ordered the parties to meet and confer to attempt to narrow a list of custodians whose documents must be...more
In this patent infringement action brought by plaintiff Trustees of Boston University ("BU") , BU alleged that defendants infringed U.S. Patent No. 5,686,738 (the "'738 Patent"), which pertains to light emitting diodes...more
In July 2013, the Advisory Council for the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, a committee that includes Federal Circuit litigators, law professors, court clerks, and government attorneys, issued a “Model Order...more
Cloud computing sales are poised to triple by 2017, according to IHS Technology. With growth comes competition and the potential for disputes, both intellectual property-related and otherwise. This article surveys some of the...more
In an October 2013 order in Digital Vending Services International, Inc. v. University of Phoenix, the judge refused to grant the defendants’ request for spoliation sanctions but punished the plaintiff for its disclosure of...more
Find an Intellectual Property Author »
Back to Top