Octane Fitness v. ICON

News & Analysis as of

The District Court May Consider Objective Reasonableness of the Infringement Defenses as Part of the Evaluation of the Totality of...

On remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court that defendant ION Geophysical Corporation (ION) does not willfully infringe the asserted patents of plaintiff WesternGeco...more

Are Patent Opinions Again Necessary?

Patent opinions are no longer necessary to avoid an inference at trial that the opinion would have been unfavorable, but, in view of the recent Supreme Court decisions in Halo and Octane Fitness they may be advisable upon...more

Ninth Circuit Could Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Standard for Federal Trademark Litigation

In Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness (2014), the Supreme Court changed the standard for recovering attorneys’ fees in patent litigation. Rejecting a “rigid and mechanical formulation,” the Court adopted a looser...more

Supreme Court Reinvigorates Effectiveness of Obtaining an Opinion of Counsel to Defend against Potential Enhanced Damages for...

On June 13, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court again reversed a decision of the Federal Circuit—the Circuit specially designated to hear all patent appeals—this time, in articulating the test for determining whether to award...more

Extending the Reach of Octane Fitness Under the Lanham Act **WEB ONLY**

The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit adopted and applied the Supreme Court of the United States’ rationale for an award of attorneys’ fees in patent cases to a trademark case. In doing so, the Fifth Circuit aligned...more

The New Willfulness Paradigm

The Supreme Court of the United States traced two centuries of analysis related to enhanced damages in patent cases to conclude that the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s two-part test, announced nearly a decade...more

Halo V Pulse: High Court Relaxes Standard For Enhanced Patent Damages

On June 13, 2016 Chief Justice Roberts delivered a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Halo v. Pulse on the question of when enhanced damages can be awarded for patent infringement. This decision reversed...more

Supreme Court Entrusts Enhanced Damages to District Court Judges

Section 284 of the Patent Act provides that, in the event of damages for patent infringement, “the court may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” In 2007, the Federal Circuit in In re Seagate...more

Supreme Court Loosens Standard for Willful Infringement/Enhanced Damages

In a relatively rare “pro-patent” decision, the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week unanimously overruled the Federal Circuit’s so-called Seagate standard for finding willful patent infringement and awarding enhanced...more

Supreme Court Resurrects Enhanced Damages Awards Under § 284

On Monday, in a significant victory for patent owners, the U.S. Supreme Court swept away the Federal Circuit’s “inelastic” framework for assessing enhanced patent damages and found that 35 U.S.C. § 284 means what it says:...more

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

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

The U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Standard for Award of Attorneys’ Fees in Copyright Cases

On June 16, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down an important decision regarding when the prevailing party in a copyright lawsuit is entitled to recover attorneys’ fees and costs. The Copyright Act provides that “the...more

Supreme Court Unanimously Overturns Rigid Seagate Test in Favor of a Discretionary Test for Awarding Enhanced Damages

Section 284 of The Patent Act provides that in a case of infringement, courts “may increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” Under Seagate, to be entitled to enhanced damages under § 284, a patent...more

Supreme Court Adopts More Flexible Standard For Enhanced Damages For Willful Infringement

In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., the Supreme Court rejected the Federal Circuit’s two-part Seagate test for awarding enhanced damages under 35 USC § 284, finding that both the substantive requirement for...more

Stay Out of the Weeds: Egregious, Not Garden-Variety, Patent Infringement Is Subject to Enhanced Damages

On June 13, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Federal Circuit’s rigid two-part test for awarding enhanced damages in patent cases. In two cases decided together, Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., and...more

New Hope for Patent Owners: Supreme Court Eases the Path to Enhanced Damages

Under the new standard, district courts will have considerably more discretion to find that an accused infringer acted willfully and enhance damages up to three times the amount of compensatory damages....more

Supreme Court Rejects Federal Circuit’s Two-Part “Objective Recklessness” Test

The decision, which affects enhanced patent infringement damages, restores the statutory discretion of district courts, whose exercise of discretion should be channeled by sound legal principles limiting the award of enhanced...more

Supreme Court Rules District Courts to Have More Discretion in Finding Willful Patent Infringement by Malicious Pirates

On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, that an award of enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 should be within the sound discretion of a district court, albeit...more

Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. (2016)

The aphorism that "[t]he race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet," variously attributed to Damon Runyon, Franklin P. Adams, and Hugh Keough, could readily be updated to include...more

"Supreme Court Confers Broader District Court Discretion in Determining Enhanced Damages"

In a unanimous decision issued on June 13, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., relaxed the standard for awards of enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284. In so ruling, the Court...more

Supreme Court ruling increases patent owners’ ability to get enhanced damages (Halo v. Pulse)

On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court issued an opinion that replaces the Federal Circuit’s strict Seagate test for enhanced patent damages with a test that is easier for patent owners to meet. Relying extensively on the...more

Copyright and Trademark Case Review: Sibling Rivalry, Grilled Meat and Attorneys' Fees

Copyright Opinions - Sixth Circuit Upholds Siblings' Termination of Brother's Copyright Assignment: Brumley v. Albert E. Brumley & Sons, Inc., No. 15-5429 (6th Cir. May 16, 2016) - Sutton, J. In a declaratory...more

5th Circuit Adds Fuel to the Octane Fitness Fire in Lanham Act Cases

The prospect of recovering attorneys’ fees after notching a victory under the Lanham Act just got a bit rosier–at least if you find yourself prevailing in the 5th Circuit. The Lanham Act allows the recovery of attorneys’...more

Trademark Litigation Keeps Getting Cheaper (If You Win)

Slowly but surely, the extension of the Supreme Court’s 2014 Octane Fitness v. LLC v. Icon Health and Fitness, Inc. decision to trademark claims is gaining traction among federal appellate courts. The Octane Fitness decision...more

Court Orders Plaintiff to Pay Defendants’ $8 Million in Attorney’s Fees in Patent Row

Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s twin 2014 decisions in Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Management System, Inc. and Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc. attorney’s fees awards are becoming more common in patent...more

150 Results
View per page
Page: of 6
JD Supra Readers' Choice 2016 Awards

"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 to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*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.