Last week, Mintz Member Lisa Adams moderated a panel discussion between in-house attorneys that covered best practices for conducting patent clearances and obtaining non-infringement and invalidity opinions. The panel...more
A federal district court judge recently applied the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corporation, in which the Supreme Court held that lost profits damages could be awarded for...more
An introduction to § 271 -
Section 271 of Title 35 of the United States Code is the statute that codifies unlawful acts of patent infringement. The most commonly asserted provisions are § 271(a) (direct infringement), §...more
4/6/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 271(e)(1) ,
Appeals ,
Contributory Infringement ,
Damages ,
Exports ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Lost Profits ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Technology Sector
In an application of 2017 U.S. Supreme Court precedent in Impressions Products, Inc. v. Lexmark Intern., Inc., the Northern District California in International Fruit Genetics LLC v. Orcharddepot.com, No. 4:17-cv-02905-JSW,...more
2/23/2018
/ Breach of Contract ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Impression Products v Lexmark International ,
IP License ,
Patent Exhaustion ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Resales Agreements ,
SCOTUS ,
Single-Use/No Resale Restriction