Preponderance of the Evidence

News & Analysis as of

Litigation Alert: Ninth Circuit Adopts Broader Octane Fitness Standard for Attorneys’ Fees Awards under the Lanham Act

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

Octane Fitness and Highmark Apply to Ninth Circuit Attorney Fee Awards under the Lanham Act

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

Fifth District Appellate Court Reverses Defense Verdict, Remands for New Trial on Issue of Damages

Larry Claro v. Shirley Ann DeLong, 2016 IL App (5th) 150557 (August 31, 2016). The Fifth District Appellate Court recently reversed a St. Clair County jury verdict in favor of the defendant and remanded the case to the...more

Willfulness After Halo: Now What?

The general consensus is that the Supreme Court’s June decision in Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics eased the path to proving willfulness, as discussed previously on IP Litigation Current. Many speculated that one result...more

Defence & Indemnity - August 2016: II. LIABILITY ISSUES #3

C. In cases involving injuries caused by one player to another during a sporting event, there must be a deliberate intent to cause injury or reckless disregard for liability to be found. Henderson v. Canadian Hockey Assn...more

Apotex Inc. v. Wyeth LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Perhaps the most significant Supreme Court decision in the past quarter century for the working patent practitioner is Dickinson v. Zurko, which strictly speaking is less a patent case than an administrative law decision. ...more

Intellectual Property Bulletin - Summer 2016

Supreme Court Expands Discretion to Award Enhanced Damages for Patent Infringement and Eliminates the Federal Circuit’s ‘Seagate Test’ - In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court...more

Netsirv v. Boxbee, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

A post grant review (PGR) is an administrative reconsideration of a recent-granted U.S. patent. The proceeding is held in the USPTO, before that body's Patent Trial and Appeal Board. A petition for PGR is timely if it is...more

In re Aqua Products, Inc. -- CAFC Grants Rehearing En Banc to Consider PTAB Motions to Amend

On Friday, August 13, 2016, the Federal Circuit granted a petition for rehearing en banc filed in the In re Aqua Products, Inc. case to consider two questions related to the PTAB's treatment of Motions to Amend in IPR...more

Halo Shines Bright in D. Mass.

A recent order from the District of Massachusetts sheds light on how the Supreme Court’s June 2016 decision in Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics is being interpreted by the district courts. The Memorandum and Order by...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - August 2016

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

The Renewed Importance of Opinions of Counsel in Patent Infringement Actions

Several recent court decisions in patent infringement actions reflect the significant impact of the Supreme Court's ruling in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., which dramatically altered the landscape for...more

Halo, It's me, Your advice of counsel opinion

Supreme Court opinion that created reduced standard for determining willful patent infringement means potential patent infringers should strongly consider opinions of patent counsel when knowledge of possible infringement...more

PTO Cannot Raise & Decide Unpatentability Theories Never Presented by the Petitioner

In In re Magnum Tools International, Ltd., [2015-1300] (July 25, 2016) the Federal Circuit reversed the PTAB’s determination that the challenged claims U.S. Patent No. 8,079,413 were invalid for obviousness. The Federal...more

In Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics, Supreme Court Strikes Down Seagate Test for Enhanced Damages Under Section 284 of the...

Patent infringement plaintiffs and defendants alike fret over enhanced damages: Section 284 of the Patent Act, the basis for enhanced damages, provides that a court may grant a damages award up to three times actual damages....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

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

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

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

Federal Circuit Patent Updates - June 2016

Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee (No. 2015-446, 6/20/16) (Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Ginsburg, Breyer, Alito, Sotomayor, Kagan) - June 20, 2016 12:49 PM - Breyer, J. Affirming Federal Circuit decision that the...more

Supreme Court Corner: Q2 2016

Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. PATENT – Decided: Jun. 13, 2016 Issue: Whether the Federal Circuit’s two-part test for willful patent infringement, with separate...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

High Court Eases Ability to Recover Enhanced Remedies in Patent and Copyright Cases

Within the past week, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two unanimous rulings that could make it easier for prevailing parties in patent cases to recover enhanced damages and for winning parties in copyright cases to recover...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

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

High Court Relaxes Standards for Enhanced Damages in District Court Patent Litigation

On June 13, 2016, in a much-anticipated joint holding in Halo/Stryker, [1] the Supreme Court unanimously overturned the Federal Circuit’s rigid test for willful infringement under Seagate and conferred discretion on district...more

82 Results
View per page
Page: of 4
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.