Meritas Capability Webinar - Controlling Where to Fight and Who Pays for it?
In Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Almirall, LLC, the Federal Circuit recently found 35 U.S.C. § 285 did not authorize the Court awarding attorney’s fees for conduct occurring at the PTAB. No. 2020-1106, 2020 WL 2961939, at *2...more
HITKANSUT LLC V. UNITED STATES - Before Prost, Clevenger, and Moore. Appeal from the Court of Federal Claims. Summary: Fee-shifting under 28 U.S.C. § 1498(a), turns on whether “the position of the United States was...more
Design Patents—Supreme Court Decides Samsung v. Apple - Why it matters: On December 6, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Samsung v. Apple, holding that, for purposes of a "total profits" damages award for infringement of a...more
In most litigation, each party pays its own attorney fees and costs, regardless of the outcome of the case. The Patent Act of 1952, however, allowed for an award of fees to the prevailing party in patent litigation in...more
Intellectual property litigation is expensive for both the plaintiff and defendant. However, because defendants are required to defend themselves in a lawsuit—in comparison to a plaintiff who has the choice to file and...more
Addressing the degree to which litigation conduct can preclude the recovery of fees under 35 U.S. C. § 285, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the denial of a fee award, finding that sloppy litigation...more
The field of patent law is in a state of flux. Just four years after the America Invents Act (“AIA”) went into effect, Congress is taking up the issue once again, this time seeking to pass legislation to curb abusive patent...more
On February 5, 2015, Rep. Robert Goodlatte (R-VA) introduced H.R. 9, entitled the “Innovation Act.” Among other things, the bill would direct courts to award attorneys’ fees and litigation-related expenses to prevailing...more
There is a continued need for patent reform to address the asymmetrical costs that patent litigation imposes on defendants. Given the substantial costs imposed on U.S. technology companies by the number of suits brought by...more
Anyone that has been monitoring the outcome of district court cases recently will be aware of the perils of not including sufficient information, or not timely supplementing, preliminary infringement or invalidity contentions...more
Fee-shifting in patent infringement suits has been authorized by statute since 1952, for application in “exceptional cases.” For the past nine years, that statute has not often been applied as a result of the Federal...more
In the recent cases OCTANE FITNESS, LLC v. ICON HEALTH & FITNESS, INC. and HIGHMARK INC. v. ALLCARE HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEM, INC., the U.S. Supreme Court empowered district court judges to award attorney fees to prevailing...more
Efforts by the U.S. Senate to pass an alternative to the Innovation Act, which aims to reform abusive patent litigation, have stalled. Sen. Patrick Leahy, who is leading the effort, has announced that his committee is tabling...more
Two decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court on April 29, 2014 may have an impact on the “patent trolls” debate by changing the rules relating to the award of attorney fees to a winning party in litigation relating to patent...more
Patent reform legislation has garnered much national attention over the past year, as Congress has introduced numerous proposals to curb perceived litigation abuse by patent trolls. (See our previous alert here.) The House of...more
What everybody doesn't seem to know is how to get Congress to listen to the needs of the innovation community when well-heeled sectors put their lobbying and financial support in favor of legislation purportedly aimed at...more