Brooks Kushman P.C.

Contact
Share
Info
1000 Town Center
Twenty-Second Floor
Southfield, Michigan 48075-1238, United States
Phone: (248) 358-4400
Fax: (248) 358-3351
Areas of Practice
  • Commercial Law & Contracts
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Law & Trade
  • Litigation
  • Mergers & Acquisitions
  • Science, Computers, & Tech
Locations
Other U.S. Locations
  • California
  • Michigan
Number of Attorneys
50-100 Attorneys

Supreme Court to Review Forum Shopping in Patent Infringement Litigation

In a development that may signal a major change in patent litigation practice, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari to hear a challenge to the rules governing where patent owners can file infringement actions against…more

Certiorari, Corporate Liability, Forum Shopping, Patent Infringement, Patent Litigation

See all updates »

NPE’s Warning Letters, In-Person Meeting with Accused Infringer, and Prior Lawsuits Are Sufficient To Establish Person Jurisdiction in Unfavorable Forum

In a recent case applying the constitutional limits of personal jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action filed by an accused patent infringement against a foreign non-practicing entity, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the…more

Declaratory Judgments, Foreign Entities, Minimum Contacts, Non-Practicing Entities, Patent Infringement

See all updates »

PTAB Institution Rate Continues To Lag Behind 2014 Rate, Highlighting Need For Expert Reports to Adequately Support Petition

Data released by the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for the Fiscal Year 2016 reveals that the PTAB is granting petitions to review at a rate similar to FY 2015, and significantly below the higher rate in FY 2014…more

Evidence, Expert Witness, Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Patents

See all updates »

Sixth Circuit Tackles “Metaphysical Quandary” Of Design Separability: Rules That Cheerleader Uniform Graphics Are Protected By Copyright

Varsity Brands, Inc. v. Star Athletica, LLC, Case No. 14-5237, 2015 WL 4934282 (6th Cir. Aug. 19, 2015). Addressing a subtle issue of copyright law that has perplexed other district and appeals courts, the U.S. Court of…more

Appeals, Chevron Deference, Copyright, Copyright Registration, Copyrightable Subject Matter

See all updates »

Kirtsaeng v. Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Supreme Court Sets Standard for Attorney Fee Awards in Copyright Cases

In a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that in considering whether to award attorneys’ fees to a prevailing party as an element of “costs” under the Copyright Act, a court should give substantial weight to…more

Attorney's Fees, Copyright, Copyright Infringement, Judicial Discretion, Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons

See all updates »

Update on Defend Trade Secrets Act: Courts Begin Interpreting and Applying New Federal Misappropriation Law

The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (“DTSA”) was signed into law on May 12, 2016. The statute amends the Economic Espionage Act of 1996 to provide federal court jurisdiction for civil trade secret misappropriation claims and to…more

Asset Seizure, Continuous Applications, Corporate Counsel, Defend Trade Secrets Act (DTSA), Ex Parte

See all updates »

In Rare Trademark Decision, Supreme Court Rules That “Tacking” Is A Jury Issue

On January 21, 2015, in its first substantive trademark case in over 10 years, the U. S. Supreme Court unanimously held that when a trademark owner attempts to establish priority based on an earlier use of a nearly-identical…more

Hana Financial v Hana Bank, Jury Questions, Likelihood of Confusion, SCOTUS, Tacking

See all updates »

Federal Circuit Adopts USPTO Positions in Clarifying Ground Rules For CBM Review, Holds Versata Pricing Patent Invalid

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) introduced post-grant administrative proceedings as a new mechanism for challenging the validity of issued patents without the need to resort to federal court litigation. In a recent…more

Administrative Authority, America Invents Act, Covered Business Method Patents, Judicial Review, Patent Invalidity

See all updates »

Federal Circuit Panel Reaffirms “Single Entity Rule” – One Infringer Must Be Responsible For Performing All Steps Of Methods Claims

On May 13, 2015, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit again considered the circumstances in which a defendant may be liable for direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) when multiple actors carry out the…more

Akamai Technologies, Claim Construction, Covered Business Method Patents, Direct Infringement, Patent Infringement

See all updates »

Federal Circuit Reaffirms Kessler Doctrine As A Patent Infringement Defense For Customers

Applying a doctrine dating to Kessler v. Eldred, 206 U.S. 285 (1907), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently ruled that when a patentee’s infringement action against the manufacturer of an accused product…more

Collateral Estoppel, Defense Strategies, Doctrine of Equivalents, Final Judgment, Kessler Doctrine

See all updates »

Statements Made In IPR Preliminary Responses May Trigger Later Prosecution Disclaimer

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that a patent owner’s statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create prosecution…more

America Invents Act, Apple, Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding, Patent Infringement, Patent Litigation

See all updates »

PTAB Obviousness Decision Must Provide “Reasoned Explanation” For Motivation To Combine References

In a recent pair of decisions, the Federal Circuit has tightened the procedural and substantive requirements for Board decisions on obviousness. In Nuvasive, the Federal Circuit vacated a PTAB final decision that challenged…more

Administrative Procedure Act, Appeals, Due Process, Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding, Obviousness

See all updates »

PTAB Decisions Add Some Clarity to Estoppel in AIA Post-Grant Proceedings

The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”) created three new mechanisms for members of the public, including competitors, to challenge the validity of an issued U.S. Patent. As of June 30, 2015, 3,160 petitions for inter partes…more

America Invents Act, Claim Preclusion, CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Covered Business Method Patents, Estoppel

See all updates »

Design Protection Goes Global: The Hague Agreement Will Change Industrial Design Strategies

The Hague Agreement Concerning the International Registration of Industrial Designs, more commonly known as the “Hague Agreement,” is a treaty that establishes an international filing system for industrial design applications…more

Damages, Design Patent, Hague Agreement, Industrial Design, Patent Filings

See all updates »

Method For Preserving Hepatocytes Patent-Eligible, Despite Use Of Newly-Discovered Natural Cell Characteristics

Rapid Litigation Management, Inc. v. CellzDirect, Inc., No. 2015-1570 (Fed. Cir. July 5, 2016) - The Federal Circuit recently held that a patent covering a process for producing a preparation of frozen liver cells…more

CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Life Sciences, Method Claims, Myriad-Mayo, Patent-Eligible Subject Matter

See all updates »

Rejecting Pendency of Related Cases as a Dominant Factor, Federal Circuit Orders ED Texas to Transfer Patent Infringement Case to ND California

In re Google, Inc., Case No. 2017-107 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 23, 2017)(nonprecedential). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a writ of mandamus ordering the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of…more

Appeals, Google, Motion to Transfer, Patent Infringement, Patent Litigation

See all updates »

B&B Hardware – District Courts Consider Impact on Both Trademark and Patent Litigation

In B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, the Supreme Court held that, under some circumstances, determinations by the USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board could have preclusive effect in subsequent federal court litigation…more

B&B Hardware v Hargis Industries, Collateral Estoppel, Infringement, Issue Preclusion, Likelihood of Confusion

See all updates »

Federal Circuit Reverses PTAB, Reaffirms Requirement That Anticipating Reference Disclose Every Element of Claimed Invention

The Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s final written decision that a challenged claim in a patent relating to systems for controlling torque in electromagnetic motors was unpatentable due to…more

Patent Litigation, Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Patents

See all updates »

B&B Hardware – District Courts Consider Impact on Both Trademark and Patent Litigation

In B&B Hardware v. Hargis Industries, the Supreme Court held that, under some circumstances, determinations by the USPTO Trademark Trial and Appeal Board could have preclusive effect in subsequent federal court litigation…more

B&B Hardware v Hargis Industries, Collateral Estoppel, Infringement, Issue Preclusion, Likelihood of Confusion

See all updates »

NPE’s Warning Letters, In-Person Meeting with Accused Infringer, and Prior Lawsuits Are Sufficient To Establish Person Jurisdiction in Unfavorable Forum

In a recent case applying the constitutional limits of personal jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action filed by an accused patent infringement against a foreign non-practicing entity, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the…more

Declaratory Judgments, Foreign Entities, Minimum Contacts, Non-Practicing Entities, Patent Infringement

See all updates »

Federal Circuit Rules that Patents Directed to Collecting and Filtering Network Data Are Eligible, Further Refining Alice/Mayo Test

Amdocs (Israel) Ltd. v. Openet Telecom, Inc., No. 2015-1180 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 1, 2016) - In a recent case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revisited the vexing problem of assessing patent eligibility for…more

Abstract Ideas, Appeals, CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Computer-Related Inventions, Judgment on the Pleadings

See all updates »

Rejecting Pendency of Related Cases as a Dominant Factor, Federal Circuit Orders ED Texas to Transfer Patent Infringement Case to ND California

In re Google, Inc., Case No. 2017-107 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 23, 2017)(nonprecedential). The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a writ of mandamus ordering the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of…more

Appeals, Google, Motion to Transfer, Patent Infringement, Patent Litigation

See all updates »

Alice And The Abstract Idea

On June 19, 2014 the U.S. Supreme Court in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. _____ (2014) (Alice) struck down method claims related to mitigating “settlement risk” in financial transactions as being…more

Alice Corporation, CLS Bank, CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Mayo v. Prometheus, Patent Litigation

See all updates »

Federal Circuit Rules that Patents Directed to Collecting and Filtering Network Data Are Eligible, Further Refining Alice/Mayo Test

Amdocs (Israel) Ltd. v. Openet Telecom, Inc., No. 2015-1180 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 1, 2016) - In a recent case, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revisited the vexing problem of assessing patent eligibility for…more

Abstract Ideas, Appeals, CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Computer-Related Inventions, Judgment on the Pleadings

See all updates »

Recent Developments In Information Technology Law – Third Quarter 2014

The 2013-14 term of the Supreme Court ended with multiple decisions on intellectual property issues. Over the past few months, the Court issued a number of patent law related opinions covering ground from claim…more

CLS Bank v Alice Corp, Highmark v. Allcare, Limelight Networks, Nautilus Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Octane Fitness v. ICON

See all updates »

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.

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
*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.
Feedback? Tell us what you think of the new jdsupra.com!