In 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States issued its ruling in Octane Fitness (IP Update, Vol. 17, No. 5), in which it examined the fee-shifting provision of the Patent Act and clarified the types of “exceptional” cases...more
Ninth Circuit joins growing trend in circuit courts, which has practical implications for trademark litigants on both sides. Two years have passed since the US Supreme Court added some teeth to the Patent Act’s...more
This week, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit joined a majority of appellate courts that have rejected rigid tests for attorneys’-fees awards in favor of flexible discretion at the district court level. The...more
In the immortal words of the most recent Nobel Laureate in literature, “the times they are a changin.’” Section 35(a) of the Lanham Act provides that “[t]he court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to...more
On October 24, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit after an en banc rehearing in Sunearth, Inc. v. Sun Earth Solar Power Co., LTD., adopted the Octane Fitness standard for determining whether a case is...more
On October 24, 2016, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, sitting en banc, held that district courts analyzing a request for attorney fees under the Lanham Act should consider the totality of the circumstances, as set forth in...more
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
In 2015, U.S. courts provided trademark practitioners with several issues to discuss and debate. Identified and summarized below are the top five most discussed issues....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
Have you ever wished you could make the abusive party on the other side of your patent suit pay for your attorney's fees? The U.S. Supreme Court has made your wish a reality. Recent U.S. Supreme Court precedent has made it...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
Fair Wind Sailing, Inc. v. Dempster - Addressing for the first time the application of the Supreme Court decision in Octane Fitness to trademark cases, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit held that a...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
Background of Attorney’s Fees in Patent Disputes - Old Patent Act Standard – The Patent Act by its express terms permits a prevailing party, whether a plaintiff-patentee or defendant-competitor, to recover its...more