June 2017: Equitable Defenses in Patent Cases After SCA Hygiene

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

On March 21, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its highly anticipated opinion in SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, 580 U.S. , No. 15-927, slip op. (Mar. 21, 2017), eliminating the equitable defense of laches to a claim of damages for patent infringement. In doing so, the Court clarified the framework of equitable defenses available to an accused infringer. Equitable estoppel, often pled and proven alongside laches, will likely continue to be an available defense where the parties had a preexisting relationship that can give rise to an inference of the patentee’s authorization by a patentee of an accused infringer’s conduct.

Laches Is No Longer Available as a Defense to Patent Damages
The Court’s decision in SCA Hygiene eliminated laches as a defense in patent cases. The Court held that laches is not available as a defense against a claim for patent damages brought within the six-year damages capture period prescribed by 35 U.S.C. § 286. SCA Hygiene, slip op. at 16. In reaching this decision, the Court followed the reasoning in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwin- Mayer, Inc., 572 U.S. , 134 S. Ct. 1962 (2014), in which the Court held that laches cannot preclude a claim for copyright damages. The Court reasoned in Petrella that the Copyright Act’s three-year limitation period “necessarily reflects a congressional decision that the timeliness of covered claims is better judged on the basis of a generally hard and fast rule” rather than a case-specific laches determination. SCA Hygiene, slip op. at 4 (citing Petrella, slip op. at 14). Applying laches in such cases “would give judges a ‘legislation- overriding’ role that is beyond the Judiciary’s power.” Id. Applying the same reasoning, the Court in SCA Hygiene found that the Patent Act’s provision that “‘no recovery shall be had for any infringement committed more than six years prior to filing of the complaint or counterclaim,’” represented a “judgment by Congress that a patentee may recover damages for any infringement committed within six years of filing of the claim.” Id. at 6. Therefore, the Court held that laches cannot be used as a defense in a patent case against a claim for damages within the six-year period of Section 286. Id. at 4, 16.

The Doctrine of Equitable Estoppel
Although laches is no longer available, equitable estoppel is a potential defense to claims of patent infringement and is closely related to laches. The Court in SCA Hygiene expressly notes that equitable estoppel, unlike laches, remains a defense that also protects against the problem of patentees inducing accused infringers to invest in arguably infringing products. SCA Hygiene, slip op. at 16. Although delay is often a part of equitable estoppel, the focus is on misleading conduct and reliance by the accused infringer on such conduct.

Equitable estoppel has often been asserted hand-in-hand with the laches defense, but the elements and the effects of the two defenses differ. Prior to SCA Hygiene, the laches defense in patent cases required only an unreasonable and inexcusable delay by patentee in bringing suit and material prejudice to the accused infringer from the delay. A.C. Aukerman Co. v. R.L. Chaides Const. Co., 960 F.2d 1020, 1028 (Fed. Cir. 1992). Laches bars only pre-suit damages. Id.

In contrast, equitable estoppel requires more than delay and prejudice. It requires that: (a) a patentee through misleading conduct (or silence) leads the alleged infringer to reasonably infer that the patentee does not intend to enforce its patent; (b) reliance by the alleged infringer on the patentee’s conduct; and (c) materially prejudice if the patentee is allowed to proceed with its claim. Id. Thus, unlike laches, equitable estoppel requires some conduct on the part of the patentee. If established, equitable estoppel bars all relief on the claim, not just pre-suit damages. Id. at 1028, 1041.

Equitable Estoppel in Practice
Because the focus of equitable estoppel is not timeliness, but rather whether the conduct of the patentee suggests that the patentee would not enforce its patent, the focus of the inquiry is often the relationship between the patentee and accused infringer.

An overt threat of enforcement of a patent followed by a long period of silence may raise equitable estoppel. For example, if a patentee provides notice of alleged infringement of multiple patents but only follows up on a subset of those patents, it may be reasonable for the accused infringer to infer that the patentee does not intend to pursue the omitted patents. In Aspex Eyewear Inc. v. Clariti Eyewear, Inc., 605 F.3d 1305 (Fed. Cir. 2010), the patentee sent a letter to the accused infringer asserting that “some” of accused infringer’s products “may” be covered by four of patentee’s patents. Id. at 1308. Within days, Aspex sent a similar letter identifying a fifth patent, also without any specificity as to which products it contended may infringe which claims. Id. at 1309. The accused infringer responded with a request for more information, including the claims patentee contended applied and the products, by model number, the patentee accused. Patentee then identified claims from only two of the five patents identified in the original correspondence, which the accused infringer addressed in subsequent correspondence. Id. There was no further contact for more than three years, at which point patentee raised alleged infringement of only one of the three previously unaddressed patents from three years before. Id. The court found that this sequence of events could be viewed as a tacit withdrawal of the patent from which it was reasonable for the accused infringer to infer that patentee would not enforce the patent. Id. at 1311. In Radio Systems v. Lalor, 709 F.3d 1124 (Fed. Cir. 2013), the court affirmed a finding of equitable estoppel where a patentee was silent for over four and a half years after the accused infringer responded to an initial demand letter. 709 F.3d at 1125, 1130.

A patentee’s course of conduct in connection with an ongoing relationship with the accused infringer also can support a finding of equitable estoppel. In High Point Sarl v. Sprint Nextel Corp., 817 F.3d 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the court affirmed summary judgment of equitable estoppel where a patentee’s predecessors in interest in the patents worked with Sprint to developed the accused CDMA network without ever raising infringement concerns on its patents. Defendant Sprint entered licenses and supply agreements with Lucent, the prior owner of the patents, concerning developing with other vendors interoperability standards for Sprint’s CDMA network. Over a decade, the Sprint network grew and used unlicensed equipment supplied by multiple vendors without challenge by the patent owners. Indeed, patent holders were “not only silent as to infringement concerns, they were actively involved in licensing arrangements involving the patents, discussing interoperability with other potentially infringing vendors, and continuing business relationships.” 817 F.3d at 1331. This silence with respect to the patents while at the same time actively helping to build, and profiting from the creation of, the Sprint network was misleading conduct sufficient to support a finding of equitable estoppel.

Similarly, in Mass Engineered Design, Inc. v. Ergotron, 633 F. Supp. 2d 361, 386 (E.D. Tex. 2009), the court found a six-year course of dealing between the patentee and the accused infringer concerning an accused product There, the patentee sold accused infringer’s products for six years without mentioning or asserting its patent, and even encouraged the accused infringer to sell the accused products through others. Id. at 386. Patentee’s encouragement of sales of the accused products was sufficient affirmative conduct to lead the accused infringer to believe that patentee would not assert its patent rights. Id.

One interesting approach for an accused infringer in litigation is to present the patentee with a sample product during negotiations, and to inform the patentee that the new product would be considered non-infringing unless the patentee advised them otherwise. See Scholle Corp. v. Blackhawk Molding Co., Inc., 133 F.3d 1468 (Fed. Cir 1998). In Scholle, after litigation commenced about a predecessor product, the accused infringer presented samples of its new design to patentee, along with the assertion that, absent disagreement from the patentee, the new design would be considered non-infringing. Id. at 1470. Patentee did not respond to the statements concerning the new product, while the parties continued to have contact about other matters, including concerning the ongoing litigation about the predecessor product. The Court found that this cooperative behavior, particularly in light of previous threats, created a reasonable inference that the patentee would not sue based on the design-around product. Id. at 1470-71; see also John Bean Techs. Corp. v. Morris & Assoc., 2016 WL 7974654 (E.D. Ark. Dec. 14, 2016) (granting summary judgment to accused infringer who proactively sent a letter to patentee who was writing to accused infringer’s customers threatening suit, explaining why it believed the claims were not valid; patentee never responded but sued nearly twelve years later).

The reasonable inference that a patentee will not pursue a particular patent or patent claims alone is not enough to establish equitable estoppel. An accused infringer must also show that it relied on patentee’s misleading conduct. Facts supporting reliance may include expanded promotion of the accused products, expanded sales of the accused products, expanded product lines using the accused technology, and/or increased expenditures such as building plants or hiring employees to produce, promote and sell the accused products, provided that these activities were undertaken, at least in part, based on the understanding that patentee would not sue. As with the misleading conduct element, the parties course of conduct may be persuasive with respect to reliance. For example, in the Aspex case discussed above, the same patentee had previously sued on other patents, and the accused infringer responded by agreeing to an injunction and withdrawing those products from the market. The accused infringer testified that it likely would have withdrawn its products if patentee had filed suit, rather than remaining silent for three years after the initial letter concerning alleged infringement. Aspex, 605 F.3d at 1312.

Finally, a company that has acquired an existing product line that is later accused of infringement should explore the course of dealings between its predecessor and the patentee. Equitable estoppel applies to successors-in-interest where privity has been established. See Radio Sys.Corp. v. Lalor, 709 F.3d 1124, 1131 (Fed. Cir. 2013). Accordingly, a patentee cannot defeat an otherwise valid defense of equitable estoppel by arguing that the successor company did not know of the demand letter and did not rely on silence after the demand letter. Id. at 1130-31.

Although laches does not require a showing of affirmative conduct by the patentee and merely requires unexcused delay, in practice, unless there was a substantial delay the additional evidence to prove equitable estoppel is often important to prevailing on laches. Thus, although laches is no longer a viable defense to a claim for patent damages, the impact on discovery for these equitable defenses will not likely change. The same facts that one would develop prior to SCA Hygiene to support a laches defense will likely continue to be the focus of discovery for equitable estoppel.

The Patentee’s Perspective
During the course of business dealings and while policing the market for potential infringement, patentees should carefully consider whether their conduct can be construed as creating a false sense that the patentee does not intend to assert its patent rights against a particular entity. If the patentee receives a response asserting non-infringement or invalidity, the patentee should respond or commence suit.

For example, even if, despite having initiated contact with a demand letter, the patentee determines it does not want to pursue litigation at that time, it should consider a simple follow up, at least stating that it disagrees with the accused infringer’s response and reserving all rights to pursue infringement in the future. If an accused infringer responds by asserting that its sales are de minimis and not worth pursuing, the patentee may choose to expressly respond that it is refraining from suit based on that representation but that it reserves all rights if circumstances change. It is also worth noting that, even if a patentee does not further respond to an assertion of de minimis sales, an infringer might not ultimately be able to reasonably rely on the ensuing silence as any indication with respect to future conduct if circumstances change.

A patent holder might also choose to be proactive in warning a potential competitor in advance, where, for instance, a competitor that is not yet in the market is thought to be bidding on a project that would employ infringing technology. Indeed, continued warnings of potential infringement are “precisely the opposite of the sort of conduct needed to give rise to equitable estoppel.” See Vanderlande Indus. Nederland BV v. ITC, 366 F.3d 1311, 1325 (Fed. Cir. 2004).

One important consideration for patentees is whether and how to raise patent rights and potential infringement during the course of a profitable business relationship with the potential infringer. To the extent that a patentee wants to retain the ability to assert patent rights in the future, it cannot appear to acquiesce to or encourage continued known infringement. In Sprint Communications Co. v. Time Warner Cable, Inc., 2017 WL 978107 (D. Kan., March 14, 2017), the court found that the extended course of dealings between the patentee and accused infringer would not mislead the accused infringer because the contracts between the parties “expressly provided that no intellectual property rights were being given to” the accused infringer and the court also found no evidence that patentee indicated to the accused infringer that it would never enforce the patents. Id. at *4. Similarly, in Robertson Transformer Co. v. General Electric Co., 191 F. Supp. 3d 826 (N.D. Ill. 2016), the court denied summary judgment and found no equitable estoppel because “every communication of record” between patentee and accused infringer concerning the parties’ joint project “explicitly mentioned a royalty arrangement between the parties.” Id. at 834. It is also possible for the parties to acknowledge the potential infringement dispute and agree to toll the limitations period to preserve the right to damages as a compromise.

It is worth noting that a patentee who has acquired existing patents must explore any past relationship between prior owners and the potential infringer. The effect of equitable estoppel is a license to use the invention that extends throughout the life of the patent. See High Point Sarl, 817 F.3d at 1331 Accordingly, a subsequent purchaser of the patent rights may be equitably estopped from recovering from an accused infringer that reasonably relied on a predecessor owner’s misleading conduct to its detriment.

Lesson: Always Follow Up
As a practical matter, for both patentees and accused infringers, the focus is on the relationship and communications between the parties to identify any conduct or facts that support (or refute) an inference that a patentee is not going to enforce its patent. As a result, it is important to investigate and develop facts such as:

The relationship between the parties for the technology that is the general subject matter of the patents. Should the patentee be in a position to know about potential infringement and to comment on it to the accused infringer?

What interactions may have taken place involving predecessors in ownership of the patent or the accused product line?

The specific communications between the patentee and the accused infringer regarding the patent. Has the patentee identified the patent, specific claims, specific assertions against an accused product to suggest that the patentee is aware of the alleged infringement?

The overt communication from the accused infringer responding to notice of infringement. What has the accused infringer told the patentee about the assertions?

How has the patentee responded to the accused infringer? Has there been silence with respect to the allegations as opposed to other business that the two parties may have with each other?

What actions has the accused infringer taken during the time since the patentee last communicated with the accused infringer about the allegations? This evidence should be cataloged carefully to support not only actual reliance but also the extent of the reliance to help demonstrate prejudice.

Equitable estoppel is a fact specific defense that does not fit into any precise formula. It will be important for both accused infringers and patentees to thoroughly marshal the facts relating to the conduct of all patent owners and how that conduct is perceived by the accused infringer and its privities, how the accused infringer relied on such conduct to its detriment and quantifying the extent of prejudice, both economic and evidentiary. Often, the facts will depend on who last responded and what was the length of silence or inaction with respect to the specific allegations. In many cases, it will be a question of who spoke last on the issue of potential infringement.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

Related Case Law

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide

JD Supra Privacy Policy

Updated: May 25, 2018:

JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.

This Privacy Policy describes how JD Supra, LLC ("JD Supra" or "we," "us," or "our") collects, uses and shares personal data collected from visitors to our website (located at www.jdsupra.com) (our "Website") who view only publicly-available content as well as subscribers to our services (such as our email digests or author tools)(our "Services"). By using our Website and registering for one of our Services, you are agreeing to the terms of this Privacy Policy.

Please note that if you subscribe to one of our Services, you can make choices about how we collect, use and share your information through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard (available if you are logged into your JD Supra account).

Collection of Information

Registration Information. When you register with JD Supra for our Website and Services, either as an author or as a subscriber, you will be asked to provide identifying information to create your JD Supra account ("Registration Data"), such as your:

  • Email
  • First Name
  • Last Name
  • Company Name
  • Company Industry
  • Title
  • Country

Other Information: We also collect other information you may voluntarily provide. This may include content you provide for publication. We may also receive your communications with others through our Website and Services (such as contacting an author through our Website) or communications directly with us (such as through email, feedback or other forms or social media). If you are a subscribed user, we will also collect your user preferences, such as the types of articles you would like to read.

Information from third parties (such as, from your employer or LinkedIn): We may also receive information about you from third party sources. For example, your employer may provide your information to us, such as in connection with an article submitted by your employer for publication. If you choose to use LinkedIn to subscribe to our Website and Services, we also collect information related to your LinkedIn account and profile.

Your interactions with our Website and Services: As is true of most websites, we gather certain information automatically. This information includes IP addresses, browser type, Internet service provider (ISP), referring/exit pages, operating system, date/time stamp and clickstream data. We use this information to analyze trends, to administer the Website and our Services, to improve the content and performance of our Website and Services, and to track users' movements around the site. We may also link this automatically-collected data to personal information, for example, to inform authors about who has read their articles. Some of this data is collected through information sent by your web browser. We also use cookies and other tracking technologies to collect this information. To learn more about cookies and other tracking technologies that JD Supra may use on our Website and Services please see our "Cookies Guide" page.

How do we use this information?

We use the information and data we collect principally in order to provide our Website and Services. More specifically, we may use your personal information to:

  • Operate our Website and Services and publish content;
  • Distribute content to you in accordance with your preferences as well as to provide other notifications to you (for example, updates about our policies and terms);
  • Measure readership and usage of the Website and Services;
  • Communicate with you regarding your questions and requests;
  • Authenticate users and to provide for the safety and security of our Website and Services;
  • Conduct research and similar activities to improve our Website and Services; and
  • Comply with our legal and regulatory responsibilities and to enforce our rights.

How is your information shared?

  • Content and other public information (such as an author profile) is shared on our Website and Services, including via email digests and social media feeds, and is accessible to the general public.
  • If you choose to use our Website and Services to communicate directly with a company or individual, such communication may be shared accordingly.
  • Readership information is provided to publishing law firms and authors of content to give them insight into their readership and to help them to improve their content.
  • Our Website may offer you the opportunity to share information through our Website, such as through Facebook's "Like" or Twitter's "Tweet" button. We offer this functionality to help generate interest in our Website and content and to permit you to recommend content to your contacts. You should be aware that sharing through such functionality may result in information being collected by the applicable social media network and possibly being made publicly available (for example, through a search engine). Any such information collection would be subject to such third party social media network's privacy policy.
  • Your information may also be shared to parties who support our business, such as professional advisors as well as web-hosting providers, analytics providers and other information technology providers.
  • Any court, governmental authority, law enforcement agency or other third party where we believe disclosure is necessary to comply with a legal or regulatory obligation, or otherwise to protect our rights, the rights of any third party or individuals' personal safety, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security or safety issues.
  • To our affiliated entities and in connection with the sale, assignment or other transfer of our company or our business.

How We Protect Your Information

JD Supra takes reasonable and appropriate precautions to insure that user information is protected from loss, misuse and unauthorized access, disclosure, alteration and destruction. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. You should keep in mind that no Internet transmission is ever 100% secure or error-free. Where you use log-in credentials (usernames, passwords) on our Website, please remember that it is your responsibility to safeguard them. If you believe that your log-in credentials have been compromised, please contact us at privacy@jdsupra.com.

Children's Information

Our Website and Services are not directed at children under the age of 16 and we do not knowingly collect personal information from children under the age of 16 through our Website and/or Services. If you have reason to believe that a child under the age of 16 has provided personal information to us, please contact us, and we will endeavor to delete that information from our databases.

Links to Other Websites

Our Website and Services may contain links to other websites. The operators of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using our Website or Services and click a link to another site, you will leave our Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We are not responsible for the data collection and use practices of such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of our Website and Services and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Information for EU and Swiss Residents

JD Supra's principal place of business is in the United States. By subscribing to our website, you expressly consent to your information being processed in the United States.

  • Our Legal Basis for Processing: Generally, we rely on our legitimate interests in order to process your personal information. For example, we rely on this legal ground if we use your personal information to manage your Registration Data and administer our relationship with you; to deliver our Website and Services; understand and improve our Website and Services; report reader analytics to our authors; to personalize your experience on our Website and Services; and where necessary to protect or defend our or another's rights or property, or to detect, prevent, or otherwise address fraud, security, safety or privacy issues. Please see Article 6(1)(f) of the E.U. General Data Protection Regulation ("GDPR") In addition, there may be other situations where other grounds for processing may exist, such as where processing is a result of legal requirements (GDPR Article 6(1)(c)) or for reasons of public interest (GDPR Article 6(1)(e)). Please see the "Your Rights" section of this Privacy Policy immediately below for more information about how you may request that we limit or refrain from processing your personal information.
  • Your Rights
    • Right of Access/Portability: You can ask to review details about the information we hold about you and how that information has been used and disclosed. Note that we may request to verify your identification before fulfilling your request. You can also request that your personal information is provided to you in a commonly used electronic format so that you can share it with other organizations.
    • Right to Correct Information: You may ask that we make corrections to any information we hold, if you believe such correction to be necessary.
    • Right to Restrict Our Processing or Erasure of Information: You also have the right in certain circumstances to ask us to restrict processing of your personal information or to erase your personal information. Where you have consented to our use of your personal information, you can withdraw your consent at any time.

You can make a request to exercise any of these rights by emailing us at privacy@jdsupra.com or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

You can also manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard.

We will make all practical efforts to respect your wishes. There may be times, however, where we are not able to fulfill your request, for example, if applicable law prohibits our compliance. Please note that JD Supra does not use "automatic decision making" or "profiling" as those terms are defined in the GDPR.

  • Timeframe for retaining your personal information: We will retain your personal information in a form that identifies you only for as long as it serves the purpose(s) for which it was initially collected as stated in this Privacy Policy, or subsequently authorized. We may continue processing your personal information for longer periods, but only for the time and to the extent such processing reasonably serves the purposes of archiving in the public interest, journalism, literature and art, scientific or historical research and statistical analysis, and subject to the protection of this Privacy Policy. For example, if you are an author, your personal information may continue to be published in connection with your article indefinitely. When we have no ongoing legitimate business need to process your personal information, we will either delete or anonymize it, or, if this is not possible (for example, because your personal information has been stored in backup archives), then we will securely store your personal information and isolate it from any further processing until deletion is possible.
  • Onward Transfer to Third Parties: As noted in the "How We Share Your Data" Section above, JD Supra may share your information with third parties. When JD Supra discloses your personal information to third parties, we have ensured that such third parties have either certified under the EU-U.S. or Swiss Privacy Shield Framework and will process all personal data received from EU member states/Switzerland in reliance on the applicable Privacy Shield Framework or that they have been subjected to strict contractual provisions in their contract with us to guarantee an adequate level of data protection for your data.

California Privacy Rights

Pursuant to Section 1798.83 of the California Civil Code, our customers who are California residents have the right to request certain information regarding our disclosure of personal information to third parties for their direct marketing purposes.

You can make a request for this information by emailing us at privacy@jdsupra.com or by writing to us at:

Privacy Officer
JD Supra, LLC
10 Liberty Ship Way, Suite 300
Sausalito, California 94965

Some browsers have incorporated a Do Not Track (DNT) feature. These features, when turned on, send a signal that you prefer that the website you are visiting not collect and use data regarding your online searching and browsing activities. As there is not yet a common understanding on how to interpret the DNT signal, we currently do not respond to DNT signals on our site.

Access/Correct/Update/Delete Personal Information

For non-EU/Swiss residents, if you would like to know what personal information we have about you, you can send an e-mail to privacy@jdsupra.com. We will be in contact with you (by mail or otherwise) to verify your identity and provide you the information you request. We will respond within 30 days to your request for access to your personal information. In some cases, we may not be able to remove your personal information, in which case we will let you know if we are unable to do so and why. If you would like to correct or update your personal information, you can manage your profile and subscriptions through our Privacy Center under the "My Account" dashboard. If you would like to delete your account or remove your information from our Website and Services, send an e-mail to privacy@jdsupra.com.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Privacy Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our Privacy Policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use our Website and Services following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this Privacy Policy, the practices of this site, your dealings with our Website or Services, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: privacy@jdsupra.com.

JD Supra Cookie Guide

As with many websites, JD Supra's website (located at www.jdsupra.com) (our "Website") and our services (such as our email article digests)(our "Services") use a standard technology called a "cookie" and other similar technologies (such as, pixels and web beacons), which are small data files that are transferred to your computer when you use our Website and Services. These technologies automatically identify your browser whenever you interact with our Website and Services.

How We Use Cookies and Other Tracking Technologies

We use cookies and other tracking technologies to:

  1. Improve the user experience on our Website and Services;
  2. Store the authorization token that users receive when they login to the private areas of our Website. This token is specific to a user's login session and requires a valid username and password to obtain. It is required to access the user's profile information, subscriptions, and analytics;
  3. Track anonymous site usage; and
  4. Permit connectivity with social media networks to permit content sharing.

There are different types of cookies and other technologies used our Website, notably:

  • "Session cookies" - These cookies only last as long as your online session, and disappear from your computer or device when you close your browser (like Internet Explorer, Google Chrome or Safari).
  • "Persistent cookies" - These cookies stay on your computer or device after your browser has been closed and last for a time specified in the cookie. We use persistent cookies when we need to know who you are for more than one browsing session. For example, we use them to remember your preferences for the next time you visit.
  • "Web Beacons/Pixels" - Some of our web pages and emails may also contain small electronic images known as web beacons, clear GIFs or single-pixel GIFs. These images are placed on a web page or email and typically work in conjunction with cookies to collect data. We use these images to identify our users and user behavior, such as counting the number of users who have visited a web page or acted upon one of our email digests.

JD Supra Cookies. We place our own cookies on your computer to track certain information about you while you are using our Website and Services. For example, we place a session cookie on your computer each time you visit our Website. We use these cookies to allow you to log-in to your subscriber account. In addition, through these cookies we are able to collect information about how you use the Website, including what browser you may be using, your IP address, and the URL address you came from upon visiting our Website and the URL you next visit (even if those URLs are not on our Website). We also utilize email web beacons to monitor whether our emails are being delivered and read. We also use these tools to help deliver reader analytics to our authors to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

Analytics/Performance Cookies. JD Supra also uses the following analytic tools to help us analyze the performance of our Website and Services as well as how visitors use our Website and Services:

  • HubSpot - For more information about HubSpot cookies, please visit legal.hubspot.com/privacy-policy.
  • New Relic - For more information on New Relic cookies, please visit www.newrelic.com/privacy.
  • Google Analytics - For more information on Google Analytics cookies, visit www.google.com/policies. To opt-out of being tracked by Google Analytics across all websites visit http://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout. This will allow you to download and install a Google Analytics cookie-free web browser.

Facebook, Twitter and other Social Network Cookies. Our content pages allow you to share content appearing on our Website and Services to your social media accounts through the "Like," "Tweet," or similar buttons displayed on such pages. To accomplish this Service, we embed code that such third party social networks provide and that we do not control. These buttons know that you are logged in to your social network account and therefore such social networks could also know that you are viewing the JD Supra Website.

Controlling and Deleting Cookies

If you would like to change how a browser uses cookies, including blocking or deleting cookies from the JD Supra Website and Services you can do so by changing the settings in your web browser. To control cookies, most browsers allow you to either accept or reject all cookies, only accept certain types of cookies, or prompt you every time a site wishes to save a cookie. It's also easy to delete cookies that are already saved on your device by a browser.

The processes for controlling and deleting cookies vary depending on which browser you use. To find out how to do so with a particular browser, you can use your browser's "Help" function or alternatively, you can visit http://www.aboutcookies.org which explains, step-by-step, how to control and delete cookies in most browsers.

Updates to This Policy

We may update this cookie policy and our Privacy Policy from time-to-time, particularly as technology changes. You can always check this page for the latest version. We may also notify you of changes to our privacy policy by email.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about how we use cookies and other tracking technologies, please contact us at: privacy@jdsupra.com.

- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.