Brooks Kushman serves as design patent counsel for Ford Motor Company and has closely followed this case. Attorneys Frank Angileri and Marc Lorelli from Brooks Kushman filed an amicus brief on Ford’s behalf in the en banc...more
On April 23, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split on the issue of whether a plaintiff must prove that a defendant acted willfully in order to recover the profits made by a trademark infrigner in a suit...more
On October 17, 2019, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) published updated guidance (the “October Update”) to its January 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (the “January Guidance”). The October Update was published...more
On July 23, 2019, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (the “Federal Circuit”) issued a precedential opinion affirming summary judgment in a case that challenged the validity and enforceability of design patents...more
Although the U.S. Supreme Court historically has heard relatively few intellectual property cases, it has shown a heightened interest in recent years by granting certiorari in multiple cases each term. This trend continues in...more
12/5/2018
/ America Invents Act ,
Copyright ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Copyright Litigation ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Popular ,
Trademark Litigation ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
On November 16, 2018, the U.S. Court Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled that a software security patent owned by Ancora Technologies, Inc. claims eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The decision reversed a...more
In a decision considering the extraterritorial effect of the U.S. Patent Act, the Supreme Court has ruled that damages for patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(2) can – in at least some cases – include damages for...more
6/26/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(2) ,
35 U.S.C. § 284 ,
Appeals ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Damages ,
Domestic Injury ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Foreign Sales ,
Lost Profits ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Vacated ,
WesternGeco LLC v Ion Geophysical Corporation
In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that a patent owner’s statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create...more
A divided Federal Circuit panel recently vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board final decision ruling that challenged patent claims were unpatentable, by holding that the patent was not eligible for review under the...more
In a development that may signal a major change in patent litigation practice, the U.S. Supreme Court has granted certiorari to hear a challenge to the rules governing where patent owners can file infringement actions against...more
12/21/2016
/ Certiorari ,
Corporate Liability ,
Forum Shopping ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Principal Place of Business ,
SCOTUS ,
TC Heartland LLC v Kraft Foods ,
Venue
Medtronic, Inc. v. Robert Bosch Healthcare Systems, Inc., No. 2015-1977 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 20, 2016) -
Applying the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the AIA’s provision making inter partes review institution decisions...more
10/21/2016
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Cuozzo Speed Technologies v Lee ,
Dismissals ,
Due Process ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Jurisdiction ,
Motion for Reconsideration ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Non-Appealable Decisions ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Real Party in Interest ,
Subsidiaries
Veritas Technologies LLC v. Veeam Software Corp., No. 2015-1894 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 30, 2016).
On recurring controversy in AIA trials is the difficulty patent owners face meeting the PTAB’s strict requirements for amending...more
9/21/2016
/ Administrative Procedure Act ,
Appeals ,
Arbitrary and Capricious ,
Burden of Proof ,
Claim Construction ,
Evidence ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Motion to Amend ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Reversal ,
USPTO
Practice Points
- Federal Circuit finds Limelight liable for direct infringement even though Limelight’s customers performed certain steps of Akamai’s patented process.
- Defendants may be liable as direct...more
8/18/2015
/ Covered Business Method Patents ,
Direct Infringement ,
Divided Infringement ,
En Banc Review ,
Induced Infringement ,
Joint Enterprise Theory ,
Limelight v Akamai ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Single Entity Rule