Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Contact
Share
Info
Firm Profile: Mintz
One Financial Center
Boston, MA 02111, United States
Phone: 617-348-1696
Fax: 617-542-2241
Areas Of Practice
  • Intellectual Property
  • International Law & Trade
  • Litigation
  • Science, Computers, & Tech
Locations
Other U.S. Locations
  • California
  • D.C.
  • Massachusetts
  • New York
Other Countries
  • United Kingdom
Number of Attorneys
400+ Attorneys

Federal Circuit Rejects Google’s Bid To Shrink ITC Jurisdiction over Post-Importation Acts of Indirect Infringement

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s elimination of “Chevron deference” in the Loper decision, many commentators have suggested that the ITC’s authority over unfair imports under Section 337 might be curtailed. See Loper Bright…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, International Law & Trade, Science, Computers, & Technology

Trade Secret Thieves, Beware! The DTSA Can Reach You and Your Sales Around the Globe.

It is no secret that the misappropriation of trade secrets frequently occurs outside the United States. In a global economy, where companies have locations and markets all around the world, it is not uncommon for trade secrets…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, International Law & Trade

Understanding the 2024 USPTO Guidance Update on AI Patent Eligibility

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued an important update to its guidance on patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, specifically focusing on artificial intelligence (AI) and other…more
 /  Business Organizations, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Supreme Court Doesn’t Want to Play the Name Game: Prohibition Against Using a Person’s Name in a Registered Mark Without Consent Remains Constitutional

On June 13, 2024, the Supreme Court held that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering trademarks utilizing another person's name without consent was constitutional. In Vidal v. Elster 602 U. S. ____ (2024), the Supreme Court…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Intellectual Property

Assessing the Impact of Recent Supreme Court Decisions on Section 337 Practice – Less than Meets the Eye?

Late last month, the Supreme Court issued two opinions which seemingly shook up the field of administrative law.  As explained in this article, however, while both decisions bear significantly on certain administrative agencies,…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property, International Law & Trade

A Typo to Remember: Erroneous Patent Number in Terminal Disclaimer Destroys Exclusive Rights

Co-authored by Sam Cohen, Summer Associate 2024. On May 29, 2024, the Western District of Oklahoma in SIPCO, LLC v. JASCO Prods. Co. dismissed the plaintiff SIPCO’s patent infringement claims against defendant JASCO because of a…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

France Has Entered the Chat: Sun Patent Trust Asks French Court to Determine Global FRAND Rate for LTE-Advanced SEPs

Last week, Sun Patent Trust sued Xiaomi in France for infringement of patents claimed to be essential to the LTE-Advanced standard. In its suit, Sun Patent Trust asked French courts to set a global FRAND rate—something that has…more
 /  Intellectual Property, International Law & Trade, Science, Computers, & Technology

Is Your Blockchain Invention Patentable?

Blockchain is becoming central to more FinTech patent portfolios than ever – but it’s harder to obtain protection on blockchain than most other technologies. The US Supreme Court’s decision in Alice v. CLS Bank (2014)…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

Three Is (Not) A Magic Number: Damages Under the Discovery Rule

On May 9, 2024, the Supreme Court held that under the Copyright Act, there is no time limit on monetary recovery for a timely filed claim. In Warner Chappell Music, Inc. v. Nealy, 601 U.S. _____ (2024), the Supreme Court…more
 /  Administrative Law, Intellectual Property

Navigating AI Integration: USPTO's New Guidance for Patent and Trademark Practices

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued a pivotal guidance document, effective April 11, on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools within patent and trademark practices. This guidance signals a…more
 /  Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

In With the New? Not So Fast: The UPC’s First SEP Ruling Aligns With German Precedent

To date, the Unified Patent Court (UPC) has not held a trial involving standard-essential patents (SEPs). However, the new forum’s Mannheim Local Division has now authored its first SEP-specific order in a case between Panasonic…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

The Second Time’s a Charm: In New Damages Trial, Texas Jury More than Doubles Lump-Sum Award Against Samsung for Infringing Two SEPs

On April 17, 2024, a second Texas jury assessed damages of $142 million against Samsung, more than doubling a previous jury award of $67.5 in a protracted standard essential patent (SEP) litigation brought by G+ Communications…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Do Patent Claims to Methods of Treatment Cover In Vivo Transformations?

Where an alleged infringer administers a substance A to a subject, and the substance is subsequently transformed to a therapeutic agent X inside the subject’s body, does the administration of the substance A constitute an act of…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property

Federal Circuit Affirms Obviousness of Rifaximin Polymorph Patents and Denial of Motion to Modify Judgment After Post-Trial Patented Indication Carve Out

In a precedential opinion issued on April 11, 2024 in Salix Pharmaceuticals, Ltd. v. Norwich Pharmaceuticals Inc., Nos. 22-2153, 23-1952, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the U.S. District Court for the…more
 /  Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property, Science, Computers, & Technology

A Continuation Application is an Implicit Admission of Obviousness-Type Double Patenting When Filed from a Parent Patent

Filing a continuation application from a parent patent is an implicit admission that obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) applies to the resulting continuation patent. A Terminal Disclaimer in the continuation patent over…more
 /  Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Intellectual Property
Showing 1-15 of 681 Results
/
View per page
Page: of 46
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 Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide