Royalties Patents

News & Analysis as of

How Not to Get Snared in Brulotte’s Web

The Supreme Court’s Kimble Decision Reminds Licensors and Licensees to Evaluate Post-Expiration Royalties with Care - On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court, in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, declined to overrule–on...more

Everything Old is New Again: Post-Expiration Patent Royalties are a Bad Idea!

On Monday, the United States Supreme Court upheld the longstanding case law that prohibits a patent owner from receiving royalties after a patent has expired. In Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC (June 22, 2015) 2015 U.S....more

The Finite Life of a Patent Upheld: No Royalties After Expiration

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6 to 3 ruling citing stare decisis, upheld the half-century rule against royalty payments accruing after expiration of a patent. The Court’s decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC is a...more

Rebuffing Critics, Supreme Court Re-Affirms Ban on Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

Fifty years ago, in Brulotte v. Thys Co., the U.S. Supreme Court held that the collection of royalties after a patent’s expiration constitutes per se patent misuse. Brulotte has been widely criticized as economically...more

Supreme Court Upholds Brulotte Rule Prohibiting Post-Expiration Patent Royalties

On June 22, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC, upholding the rule, first announced in Brulotte v. Thys Co., 379 U. S. 29 (1964), that an agreement allowing a patent owner to...more

The 'Super Powered' Rule of Stare Decisis Defeats Spider Man

The Supreme Court of the United States, in a 6-3 decision, left undisturbed the rule from its 51-year-old decision in Brulotte v. Thys Co. (1964), invoking stare decisis and rejecting arguments seeking to overturn the rule...more

U.S. Supreme Court Confirms That Post Patent Expiration Royalties Are Prohibited

Background of the Case - The dispute in Stephen Kimble v. Marvel Enterprises, Inc., Case No. 13-720, ___ U.S. ___ (2015), arose out of a 2001 settlement of a prior lawsuit between the parties. The prior suit had...more

Getting Tangled in the Web of a Hybrid Royalty Clause Part II: Supreme Court Re-affirms Brulotte Decision

In July of 2013, I wrote a blog post about the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal’s decision in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment LLC and its effect upon royalty provisions in hybrid IP license agreements. (...) By “hybrid” I am...more

Supreme Court Declines To Overrule Brulotte Rule: Post-Expiration Patent Royalties Remain Unlawful

Background - Fifty years ago, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a patent license agreement that requires the licensee to pay royalties after the expiration of the licensed patent is unlawful per se, because such payments...more

Rebalancing Your IP Portfolio

Financial advisors often advise their clients to maintain a balanced investment portfolio. Occasionally these advisors recommend rebalancing the investments within a portfolio to account for changes in market...more

Supreme Court Leaves Post-Patent Expiration Royalty Rule in Place

The U.S. Supreme Court today in Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC upheld the longstanding Brulotte rule that a patent owner cannot continue to receive royalties for sales made after its patent expires. In a 6-3 decision,...more

IP Newsflash - May 2015 #4

DISTRICT COURT CASES - Eastern District of Virginia Grants Summary Judgment of Noninfringement to Adobe - On May 7, 2015, Judge Brinkema of the United States district court for the Eastern District of Virginia...more

Cost of Design Changes Need to be Factored to Avoid IP Infringements

Design changes can be costly, particularly when the latter stages of technology maturity and product incorporation have occurred. Estimates have put the cost of design changes at 100X the value of non-recurring engineering...more

Lost Profits Are Hard to Come By - Warsaw Orthopedic, Inc. et al. v. NuVasive, Inc.

Addressing the issue of convoyed and related sales, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, even while affirming the district court with respect to its invalidity and infringement findings, remanded the case for a...more

Federal Circuit Review | April 2015

No Recovery Of Lost Profits From Related Companies’ Activities - In WARSAW ORTHOPEDIC, INC. v. NUVASIVE, INC., Appeal Nos. 2013-1576, -1577, the Federal Circuit held that a company was not entitled to lost profits based...more

ITC Section 337 Update - April 2015

Motorola’s Appeal To Ninth Circuit Of A Jury Determination That Motorola Breached Its FRAND Obligation – In a case involving the first time a federal district court judge determined a FRAND royalty rate for standard essential...more

DOJ’s Endorsement of IEEE Patent Policy Takes Center Stage at IP Antitrust Conference

On April 14 in Washington, DC, Global Competition Review hosted its Second Annual IP & Antitrust USA conference. The conference covered various hot topics being closely followed by IP antitrust practitioners, including (1)...more

AstraZeneca AB v. Apotex Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit rendered a decision on damages in what may be the last of a long-running series of ANDA cases involving AstraZeneca's Prilosec® (omeprazole) franchise. As set forth in the opinion,...more

Federal Circuit Addresses Damages in the Hatch-Waxman Context

On April 7, 2015, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its decision in Astrazeneca AB v. Apotex Corp., No. 2014-1221, affirming an award of a reasonable royalty of 50% in a case arising from the...more

Kimble and Post-Expiration Royalties: The Next Big Thing, or Much Ado About Nothing?

Today, as we previewed here, the US Supreme Court analyzed the question of whether patent holders should be allowed to contract for royalty payments that continue to accrue after the expiration of the subject patent. While...more

Expert Is Not Permitted to Testify to Alternate Hypothetical Negotiation Dates Where No Hypothetical Negotiation Was Conducted for...

After the parties submitted expert reports in this patent infringement action, Ford objected to Eagle Harbor's damage expert's expected testimony and demonstratives. Ford objected to Eagle Harbor's evidence because it...more

Locating Time Frames for the Hypothetical Negotiation

In determining a reasonable royalty for patent infringement damages, district courts often use the hypothetical negotiation analysis: that is, what is the royalty rate that the patent owner and the infringer would have agreed...more

Will the European Court of Justice Conclude that Antitrust Law Prohibits Royalties for Invalid Patents?

The European Court of Justice recently announced that it will issue a decision in Genentech Inc. v. Hoechst GmbH, in response to a request from the Paris Court of Appeals for clarification on whether European antitrust law...more

Patent Exhaustion Update: The Federal Circuit Allows Royalties From Different Entities In Supply Chain

Patent exhaustion, or "the first sale doctrine," requires that the initial authorized sale of a patented item by a patent owner or licensee, terminates their ability to subsequently use their patent rights against that item....more

Aqua Shield v. Inter Pool Cover Team – Evidence of Actual Profits Does Not Hold Water in Reasonable Royalty Analysis

The Federal Circuit, in Aqua Shield v. Inter Pool Cover Team, 774 F.3d 766 (Fed. Cir. 2014), recently provided further guidance on the traditional method for assessing the market value of a patent: the hypothetical...more

67 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 3

"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*

*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.
×