News & Analysis as of

Abuse of Discretion Patents

Federal Circuit Review - August 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more

“A Reasonable Adjudicator Would have Wanted to Review this Evidence.”

In Ultratec, Inc. v. Captioncall, LLC., [2016-1706, 2016-1707, 2016-1708, 2016-1709, 2016-1710, 2016-1712, 2016-1713, 2016-1715, 2016-2366] (August 28, 2017), the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded Board decisions...more

It Pays to be Persistent if PTAB Rulings Violate Due Process Ultratec v. CaptionCall and Matal (Fed. Cir. 2017)

by Brinks Gilson & Lione on

In Ultratec, the Federal Circuit cited several problems with the Board’s permissive rules of trial proceedings and held the Board abused its discretion in its consideration of supplementary evidence. The Board’s regulations...more

Federal Circuit Review - July 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Not Finding Case Exceptional - In Rothschild Connected Devices v. Guardian Protection Services, Appeal No. 2016-2521, the Federal Circuit held that a district court abused its discretion...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In AdjustaCam v. Newegg, the Circuit reverses the denial of attorney fees where Judge Gilstrap simply adopted a pre-Octane Fitness determination by a prior judge, despite the Circuit’s post-Octane Fitness remand of the case...more

Weak Infringement Position Makes Troll-like Behavior Exceptional

In Adjustacam LLC v. Newegg, Inc., [2016-1882] (July 5, 2017) the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s decision not to award attorneys’ fees to defendant after plaintiff voluntarily dismissing its complaint after a...more

Intellectual Property Newsletter - June 2017

by Shearman & Sterling LLP on

Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its quarterly newsletter. The newsletter covers a wide range of current IP topics: the Supreme Court’s TC Heartland patent-venue decision, the constitutionality of inter...more

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In Mylan v. Aurobindo the Circuit affirms the grant of a preliminary injunction based upon the infringement of one of the three patents in suit. However, the panel reverses the injunction as to the other two patents based on...more

Federal Circuit Review | April 2017

by Knobbe Martens on

Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more

Business Litigation Report - March 2017

Culture: Meeting Regulatory Expectations - Recent scandals in the corporate and financial spheres have served to highlight the importance of a strong and well-embedded institutional culture. It is difficult to pinpoint...more

Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases

In SCA v. First Quality Baby Products, the Supreme Court holds that laches should not be available as a defense in patent cases, refusing to concur with the Circuit’s en banc holding that the Patent Act’s 6-year limitation on...more

Patent Owner Cannot Create New Claim Construction Issues After the Jury Verdict

In TVIIM, LLC v. McAfee, Inc., [2016-1562] (March 21, 2017), the Federal Circuit affirmed jury verdicts that U.S. Patent No. 6,889,168 was invalid and not infringed because substantial evidence supported the jury’s findings,...more

Enhanced Patent Damages in the Wake of Halo May Not Be So Easy to Come By

Background - Last year, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1923 (2016), the Supreme Court weighed in on the question of enhanced damages in patent cases and rejected the then-existing...more

“Unfamiliarity” with Federal Court Practice Not Enough to Avoid Default

In United Construction Products, Inc., v. Tile Tech, Inc., [2016-1392] (December 15, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed default judgment against Tile Tech on claims of patent infringement and unfair competition because of...more

Federal Circuit Turns up the Heat on PTAB on Motions to Amend

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit is increasingly scrutinizing the handling of Motions to Amend in Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB,” or the “Board”). One case...more

In-House and Outside Counsel Disqualified and Complaint Dismissed Where In-House Counsel Played Significant Role in Preparing...

In Dynamic 3D Geosolutions LLC v. Schlumberger Ltd., Nos. 15-1628, -1629 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 12, 2016), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s decision to disqualify Dynamic 3D’s counsel and dismiss its patent...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - August 2016

by Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Supreme Court Abolished Federal Circuit's Test for Willfulness - On June 13, 2016, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 579 U.S. ___ (2016), the Supreme Court unanimously abrogated the Federal Circuit’s...more

Supreme Court Makes it Easier for Medical Device Companies to Recover Enhanced Damages for Patent Infringement

by Knobbe Martens on

The Patent Act provides that, in a case of infringement, courts “may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” Previously, in order to recover enhanced damages under the Patent Act, a patent owner...more

Supreme Court Lowers the Bar for Willfulness and Provides Major Win to Patent Holders

On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in two consolidated cases (Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer) effectively lowering the standard for obtaining enhanced damages in...more

Supreme Court Abolishes Federal Circuit’s Test for Willfulness

by Morrison & Foerster LLP on

On June 13, 2016, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 579 U.S. ___ (2016), the Supreme Court unanimously abrogated the Federal Circuit’s 2007 decision in In re Seagate Tech., LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir....more

Supreme Court Clears the Path for More Enhanced Damages Awards in Halo

by McCarter & English, LLP on

In recent years, the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the Federal Circuit’s strict tests concerning monetary relief in patent cases in favor of more fluid standards that commit discretion to the district courts. In...more

Supreme Court Relaxes Standard for Willful Infringement – Higher Risk of Enhanced Damage Awards May Require Clients to Reassess...

by Brooks Kushman P.C. on

In a unanimous opinion, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the prevailing Seagate test for finding willful infringement in patent cases – a finding for which a “court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found...more

Halo’s Aura: How the Supreme Court’s Halo Decision Will Impact Patent Damages and Influence Pre-Litigation Conduct

by Foley Hoag LLP on

Patent infringers take note: clever defenses by ingenious litigation counsel may come too late to save you from an award of exemplary damages. On Monday, June 13, in Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics and Stryker Corp. v....more

Supreme Court Makes It Harder for Willful Infringers to Escape Punishment

by Mintz Levin on

The Supreme Court has made it easier for patent owners to prove willful infringement and entitlement to enhanced damages. In a unanimous opinion issued yesterday in a pair of cases decided together, Halo Electronics, Inc. v....more

IP Alert: "A Victory for Patent Owners - Relaxation of the Standard for Enhanced Damages"

by Porter Hedges LLP on

Yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its much-anticipated, combined decision in Halo v. Pulse Electronics and Stryker v. Zimmer, relaxing the standard for awarding enhanced damages in patent litigation under 35 U.S.C. §...more

46 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 2
Cybersecurity

"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.