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
Post-Grant Insights: The Impact of PTAB Appeals on the Federal Circuit
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
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
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
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
Rejecting claims that the matter was “exceptional” under 35 U.S.C. § 285 so as to permit the recovery of attorneys’ fees, Judge Forrest declined to award fees incurred between the court’s Markman order and order on summary...more
On December 13, 2013, in CBT Flint Partners, LLC v. Return Path, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (Dyk, O'Malley, Taranto*) reversed-in-part, vacated-in-part and remanded the district court judgment...more
Battelle Energy Alliance, LLC v. Southfork Sec., Inc., 2013 WL 5637747 (D. Idaho Oct. 15, 2013).
In this copyright infringement case, the plaintiff sought an ex parte temporary restraining order forcing the defendants...more
E-discovery costs incurred by the prevailing party – easily running into the hundreds of thousands of dollars in complex commercial and IP litigations – may be compensable under 28 U.S.C. § 1920(4)....more
SK Hynix Inc. v. Rambus, Inc., 2013 WL 1915865 (N.D. Cal. May 8, 2013).
In this complex set of patent-infringement cases, the plaintiffs sought spoliation sanctions against the defendant—who prevailed in the underlying...more
A federal court in California recently awarded defendants in a patent infringement case more than $2.8 million in attorneys’ fees relating to the use of “predictive coding,” also known as “computer-assisted technology,” to...more
Court finds that using technology to undertake more efficient document review is reasonable.
On February 1, Judge Anthony J. Battaglia of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California awarded more...more
In my prior blogs I’ve addressed the legal remedies available to employers when employees violate confidentiality agreements or restrictive covenants, and unfairly compete. A new opinion by Judge Frederic Kessler, P.J. Ch....more
In This Issue:
*Patent Applicants Can Submit New Evidence to the District Court in Civil Actions Under §145
*To Quote Mark Twain, “Reports of My (Inequitable Conduct) Death Have Been Greatly...more
In this issue: Ascentive, LLC v. Opinion Corp., 2011 WL 6181452 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 13, 2011); L.F.P. IP, Inc. v. Hustler Cincinnati, Inc., 2011 WL 5024356 (S.D. Ohio Oct. 20, 2011); Marketquest Group, Inc. v. BIC Corp., 2011 WL...more
Find an Intellectual Property Author »
Back to Top