On December 11, 2019, in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., 589 U.S. __ (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) cannot recover the salaries of its legal...more
12/14/2019
/ 35 U.S.C. § 145 ,
American Rule ,
Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Civil Claims ,
Fee-Shifting ,
Lanham Act ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Applicants ,
Peter v NantKwest Inc ,
Prevailing Party ,
Remedies ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 145 ,
Summary Judgment ,
Trademark Application ,
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit ruled that a patent applicant’s obligation to pay the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) “expenses” for district court proceedings to review patent application rejections does not...more
7/31/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 145 ,
Administrative Proceedings ,
American Rule ,
Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
En Banc Review ,
Litigation Fees & Costs ,
Patent Examinations ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Reversal ,
Split of Authority ,
Sua Sponte ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO ,
Vacated
On June 16, 2016, in an 8-0 decision in Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 579 U.S. __, the U.S. Supreme Court held that when district courts determine whether or not to award discretionary attorney fees to prevailing...more
This is the sixth edition of The Class Action Chronicle, a quarterly publication that provides an analysis of recent class action trends, along with a summary of class certification and Class Action Fairness Act rulings...more