Governed by 19 U.S.C. § 337, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) is empowered to investigate unfair acts in the importation of articles into the United States. The ITC can be a powerful forum for owners of U.S....more
3/26/2025
/ America First Trade Policy ,
Biden Administration ,
Department of Justice (DOJ) ,
FRAND ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
International Trade Commission (ITC) ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Preliminary Injunctions ,
Trump Administration ,
USPTO
In a decision dated February 1, 2022, the Federal Circuit confirmed that applicant admitted prior art (AAPA) may not form the basis of a validity challenge in an inter partes review (IPR). The decision arose out of two IPRs...more
In good news for those awaiting decisions on pending motions to transfer, or those contemplating a challenge to a recent denial of their motion – especially in the ED Texas, ND California, CD California and Delaware – on...more
On October 7, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued another decision in the ongoing patent litigations between Apple and Samsung that began in the Northern District of California. The district court had found at summary judgment...more
11/3/2016
/ Appeals ,
Apple ,
Apple v Samsung ,
En Banc Review ,
FRCP 35 ,
JMOL ,
Judgment As A Matter Of Law ,
Jury Verdicts ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Petition For Rehearing ,
Reversal ,
Samsung
On May 12 and May 17, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued decisions in two § 101 cases, EnFish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp. and In re TLI Communications, LLC. Both authored by Judge Hughes, the decisions illustrate the difficult...more
This March, three United States Senators introduced the “Venue Equity and Non-Uniformity Elimination Act of 2016.” The bill would dramatically narrow the venue statute that applies to patent cases and, it appears, prevent...more
Patent holders and accused infringers will need to continue being creative in drafting license agreements after the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Kimble v. Marvel, No. 13-720, 2015 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 4067, at *6 (June 22,...more
8/24/2015
/ Brulotte ,
Declaratory Judgments ,
Kimble v Marvel Enterprises ,
License Agreements ,
Patent Expiration ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Royalties ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Stare Decisis
In 2013, the Supreme Court decided three patent cases. By June of 2014, it is expected that there will have been six more decisions in patent cases. This week alone, there have been oral arguments heard or decisions released...more
On February 25, 2014, Chief U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis of the Eastern District of Texas unveiled an optional accelerated discovery schedule for cases involving claims of patent infringement. General Order 14-3...more
The start of a new year is a good time for reflection – an excuse to take stock of where we are, how we got here and where we’re going. So it seems appropriate to observe that 2013 was a big year for accused infringers in...more
The Federal Circuit recently confirmed that district courts must still exercise discretion in deciding motions to sever where the heightened joinder requirements of the AIA are satisfied.
In In re Nintendo, Co.¸ __...more