A frequent issue seen within patent litigation is whether serving a complaint satisfies the knowledge requirement for post-complaint indirect infringement. This issue affects the amount of, if any, damages a patent owner can...more
Patent owners that lack sufficient resources are often required to utilize the services of an outside litigation funding source to vindicate their patent rights. Often times, these patent owners communicate with such...more
The Federal Circuit recently provided strategic guidance for defending software claims against Alice challenges that claims recite ineligible patent subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In Mentone Solutions LLC v. Digi...more
A recent decision by a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) panel in Canadian Solar Inc., et al v. The Solaria Corporation may have opened the door for aggrieved parties to seek rehearing for any reason, rather than the...more
The United States FRAND jurisprudence had a recent watershed moment in a decision that is sure to reverberate through the standard essential patent (SEP) world, and specifically SEP litigation in the United States. Earlier...more
In earlier blogs, we discussed when to amend and when not to amend claims in an inter partes review (“IPR”) pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 316(d)(1). Below are guidelines on the procedural aspects of filing a motion to amend...more
On Monday, the Supreme Court denied TCL Communication’s certiorari petition, without comment, appealing the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the essentiality of a patent claim is a question for the jury rather than judges to...more
When confronted with instituted IPRs, Patent Owners should identify and exploit issues that the Petition glossed over and bring those to the attention of the Board. This will highlight for the Board important issues that the...more
The right expert can be the critical piece that saves the validity of your patent. Finding the right expert for a patent owner requires careful selection and due diligence. We previously detailed how your expert’s testimony...more
Arguing against material constructions proffered by an IPR petition is a basic building block of the patent owner’s preliminary response. Obviously, patent owners must investigate and advocate for claim constructions for...more
Building on Tip #4, one effective way to avoid institution and not address facts is to point out shortcomings in the petition's application of KSR when asserting motivation to combine for an obviousness analysis. The Patent...more
11/13/2020
/ Claim Construction ,
Claim Limitations ,
Denial of Institution ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motivation to Combine ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
POSITA ,
Prior Art
Venue selection is a critical component to any patent enforcement strategy, even before the inception of the PTAB as we know it today. Venue now has even greater importance, as the speed of your patent case (i.e. time to...more
Implementer Hold Out -
Another major development in global standard essential patent litigation was handed down today, as the UK Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings that forced an efficient infringer of essential...more
8/27/2020
/ ETSI ,
FRAND ,
Germany ,
Huawei ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Standard Essential Patents ,
Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) ,
UK ,
UK Supreme Court
The Federal Circuit yesterday, in a decision likely to be celebrated by holders of standard essential patents (“SEPs”), found that it is appropriate for the jury to decide essentiality of a patent, rather than the judge...more
Entities with patent-related relationships with state universities scored a victory under the rarely implicated (at least for patent practitioners) doctrine of sovereign immunity. For patent holders, sovereign immunity comes...more
7/29/2020
/ Eleventh Amendment ,
En Banc Review ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(1) ,
FRCP 19(a) ,
IP License ,
Joinder ,
License Agreements ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Sovereign Immunity ,
State Universities
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) has designated two key institution decisions as “Informative.” With these informative decisions, the PTAB has provided guidance on how the PTAB will apply efficiency and fairness...more
Recent oral arguments at the Fed Circuit suggest that the U.S. may be taking steps which would enhance its attractiveness for SEP patent holders looking to resolve licensing disputes. The Federal Circuit heard oral argument...more
Judge Albright of the Western District of Texas (“WDTX”) recently rejected yet another attempt by Apple to transfer a patent case to the Northern District of California (“NDCA”). Judge Albright’s June 19, 2020 order describes...more
A recent Memorandum Order from the District of Delaware edified the protections courts tend to give discovery concerning litigation funding. Because Defendant AT&T failed to carry its burden of demonstrating the specific...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently sent a warning to alleged infringers not to wait for the one year deadline to file IPR petitions, or risk discretionary denial. On May 13, 2020, the PTAB exercised its...more
On May 5, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) designated one decision as precedential and removed the precedential designation on another. The newly-designated precedential opinion lays out factors that the PTAB...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit, in a precedential decision, reinforced that an accused infringer can be a “prevailing party” for the purposes of seeking attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 when it successfully invalidates...more
On Wednesday, the Federal Circuit held that while assignor estoppel is applicable in district court proceedings, petitions for inter partes review continue to not be subject to the equitable remedy. Assignor estoppel is an...more
In an April 13, 2020, decision, the Federal Circuit held that neither a voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), nor a stay of a patent lawsuit pending the results of a patent reexamination,...more
The Precedential Opinion Panel (“POP”) of the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) recently rejected a rehearing request from a petitioner where institution was denied because of the likelihood that a district court...more