Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.

Ten South Wacker Drive
Chicago, IL 60606-7407, United States

  • 312.463.5000
  • 312.463.5001

Global PHP And IP5 – Latest Iteration In The Patent Prosecution Highway

The Patent Prosecution Highway (also referred to as the “PPH”)embodies numerous bilateral agreements between dozens of countries providing that an indication of allowable subject matter in one country may trigger accelerated…more

Patent Litigation, Patent Prosecution Highway, Patents

See All Updates »

Octane Fitness v. Icon and Highmark v. Allcare — Pivotal Changes to Court Awarded Attorney’s Fees in Patent Litigations

April 30, 2014 - On Tuesday, in two unanimous decisions, the Supreme Court laid down a pair of pivotal changes to the rules governing court awarded attorney's fees in patent litigations... Please see full alert below for…more

Attorney's Fees, Highmark v. Allcare, Octane Fitness v. ICON, Patent Infringement, Patent Litigation

See All Updates »

Global PHP And IP5 – Latest Iteration In The Patent Prosecution Highway

The Patent Prosecution Highway (also referred to as the “PPH”)embodies numerous bilateral agreements between dozens of countries providing that an indication of allowable subject matter in one country may trigger accelerated…more

Patent Litigation, Patent Prosecution Highway, Patents

See All Updates »

The Google Books Case – Here’s the Skinny

I’m sure many of us have fond memories of the venerable library card catalog: the musty smell, the tiny wooden drawers and their endless deck of equally tiny, yellowed cards on which someone laboriously typed the Dewey Decimal…more

Copyright, Fair Use, Google, Google Books

See All Updates »

Supreme Court Debates Laches Defense — Change Is Coming

Jan. 22, 2014 — In an energetic oral argument on Jan. 21 that would have made first-year law students cringe, the Supreme Court debated the proper role of laches as a defense against the backdrops of statutory language versus…more

Copyright, Equitable Relief, Laches, MGM, Patent Litigation

See All Updates »

Pacific Coast Marine Decision Confirms Application of Prosecution History Estoppel to Designs

The Federal Circuit handed down a 3-0 decision on Jan. 8, 2014, in Pacific Coast Marine Windshields Limited v. Malibu Boats, LLC et al., recognizing that the concept of prosecution history estoppel applies to design patents. The…more

Design Patent, Estoppel, Patent Applications, Patent Infringement, Patents

See All Updates »

Intellectual Property Alert: The Federal Circuit Upholds Cybor’s Rule that Claim Construction Is Subject to De Novo Appellate Review

Feb. 24, 2014 — On Friday, the Federal Circuit reaffirmed 6–4 in Lighting Ballast Control LLC v. Philips Electronics North America Corp., that its holding in Cybor Corp v. FAS Technologies is still good law. In short, patent…more

Claim Construction, Patent Infringement, Patent Litigation, Patents, Philips Electronics

See All Updates »

The USPTO Announces New Guidelines for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility Under 35 U.S.C. §101 in View of Myriad, Prometheus and Chakrabarty

March 10, 2014 – On March 4, 2014, the United States Patent & Trademark Office issued guidelines for the examination of “all claims (i.e., machine, composition, manufacture and process claims) reciting or involving laws of…more

AMP v Myriad, Mayo v. Prometheus, Patent Applications, Patent Litigation, Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

See All Updates »

Intellectual Property Alert: U.S. Supreme Court Rules in ABC v. Aereo

On June 26, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court decided American Broadcasting Companies, et al. v. Aereo. The 6-3 ruling holds that Aereo’s business model of streaming live broadcast television content over the Internet to its users,…more

ABC, ABC v Aereo, Aereo, Broadcasting, Cable Television Providers

See All Updates »

Aesthetic Functionality in the TTAB since Louboutin

The doctrine of aesthetic functionality was revived in the recent Louboutin case to protect the competitive need to use color to communicate a particular message. In that case, Christian Louboutin S.A. tried to enforce its…more

Aesthetic Functionality, Christian Louboutin, Functionality, Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, Trademarks

See All Updates »

Five Considerations When Choosing How to Challenge Patent Validity

Inter partes review (IPR) is quickly becoming a popular choice for challenging the validity of a patent. The America Invents Act (AIA) established IPR as a mechanism for challenging patent validity through an evidentiary…more

America Invents Act, Inter Partes Review Proceedings, Patent Litigation, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Patents

See All Updates »

Supreme Court Allows Copyright Action, Holds No Laches Defense

May 20, 2014 — Yesterday, in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. (No. 12-1315), the Supreme Court ruled that the doctrine of laches could not be invoked to bar a copyright claim that was brought within the statutorily allowed…more

Copyright, Copyright Infringement, Laches, MGM, Petrella v. MGM

See All Updates »

Standard For Amending Claims In IPR May Need To Change

The Idle Free decision denied the patent owner’s motion to amend claims on the ground that the patent owner had not proven the patentability of the claims over the prior art. Remarkably, the decision makes no reference to the…more

Intellectual Property Litigation, Motion to Amend, Patent Litigation, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Patents

See All Updates »

7 Intellectual Property Mistakes Startup Entrepreneurs Often Make

What’s the biggest mistake startup entrepreneurs make with respect to their intellectual property, and what can they do to fix it? That’s the question we recently put to IP attorneys writing on JD Supra, knowing that the…more

Business Formation, Copyright, First-to-File, Legal Perspectives, Patents

See All Updates »

U.S. Supreme Court Says Induced Infringement Requires Direct Infringement, But Leaves Direct Infringement Standard to Federal Circuit

In a decision dated June 2, 2014, in the case Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. (No. 12-786), the U.S. Supreme Court held that a defendant is not liable for induced patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. §…more

Akamai Technologies, Direct Infringement, En Banc Review, Indirect Infringement, Induced Infringement

See All Updates »

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Definiteness Standard

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its ruling in Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc. involving the definiteness requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 112 (b). The patent at issue relates to a heart rate monitor capable of…more

Claim Construction, Indefiniteness, Medical Devices, Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Patent Infringement

See All Updates »

Intellectual Property Alert: Computer-Implemented Inventions: Ideas That Are Fundamental Truths And Generically Implemented Are Not Patent Eligible

June 20, 2014 — In a unanimous opinion authored by Justice Thomas on June 19, 2014, the Court held in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 13-298, that all the patent claims in the case, meaning all method, system and…more

Alice Corporation, America Invents Act, CLS Bank, CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Mayo v. Prometheus

See All Updates »

Developments in Patent Law 2013; The D.C. Bar Year in Review

In this article: - Patentability, Validity, and Procurement of Patents - Interpretation and Infringement of Patents - Enforcement of Patents - Patents at the U.S. Supreme Court - Excerpt from…more

AMP v Myriad, Apple, Attorney's Fees, Claim Construction, CLS Bank v Alice Corp

See All Updates »

Areas of Practice
  • Antitrust & Trade Regulation
  • Appellate Practice
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
Locations
Other U.S. Locations
  • D.C.
  • Massachusetts
  • Oregon
Number of Attorneys

50-100 Attorneys

This profile may constitute attorney advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Any correspondence with this profile holder does not constitute a client/attorney relationship. Neither the content on this profile nor transmissions between you and the profile holder through this profile are intended to provide legal or other advice or to create an attorney-client relationship.