Generally, courts will not scrutinize the business decisions of litigants. Concerns arise, however, when such decisions are improperly made for the purposes of abusing the judicial process. One business decision that has...more
In a pending mandamus petition, the Federal Circuit signaled that it will address the issue of which party bears the burden of proof when venue is challenged in a patent infringement action. In re ZTE (USA), No. 2018-113...more
The Supreme Court recently upended what many practitioners considered to be the status quo on the issue of where venue lies in patent infringement actions. These cases have a special governing provision in 28 U.S.C. § 1400(b)...more
The Federal Circuit addressed the sufficiency of pleading infringement for the first time after the abrogation of Form 18 last year, in the decision Lyda v. CBS Corp., No. 2015-1923 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 30, 2016). The Court...more
On December 1, 2015, changes recommended by the Judicial Conference Advisory Committee on the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and adopted by the Supreme Court will take effect. Among these changes is elimination of the...more
11/5/2015
/ AIPLA ,
Direct Infringement ,
Discovery ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Form 18 ,
FRCP 12(e) ,
FRCP 8(a) ,
Intellectual Property Owner’s Association (IPO) ,
Notice Pleading Standards ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Pleadings ,
Twombly/Iqbal Pleading Standard