The Chartwell Chronicles: New Jersey Attorney Fees
Policyholders vs. Insurers: 3 Arguments to Make When Selecting Defense Counsel & Hourly Rates
Hinshaw Insurance Law TV: Recent Changes in Florida Property Insurance Law and How They Will Affect First Party Insurance
How to Secure Advances to Fund Legal Fees
Legislative Update: Cannabis, COVID-19, COMAR and More
Let's Talk About How Much It Costs To Get Divorced
Employment Law and Attorney Fees from the Employee Perspective | Jason Smith | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Let's Talk Retaining a Family Law Lawyer
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
THE PAPER CHASE
VIDEO: Are PA Workers Compensation Attorney Fees Now Taken from Medical Benefits Too?
What Should I Do If My Employer Failed to Pay Me Wages?
6 Key Takeaways | Ethics Developments in California
Meritas Capability Webinar - Controlling Where to Fight and Who Pays for it?
Who pays attorney fees in a divorce proceeding?
SEC Whistleblower Program: What Employers Need to Know
Bill on Bankruptcy: Lawyers Must Disclose What Clients Pay
Bill on Bankruptcy: Stockton May Win the Battle, Lose the War
On cross-appeals from a granted Fed. R. of Civ. Pro. 12(c) motion on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent directed to a method for “assist[ing] an investigator in...more
In Dragon Intellectual Property LLC v. Dish Network L.L.C. No. 22-1621 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2024), the Federal Circuit clarifies the standard for “exceptional” cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The case concerns attorneys’ fees and...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. ZIRCON CORP. v. ITC (2022-1649, 05/08/2024) (Lourie, Bryson, and Stark) - Bryson, J. The Court affirmed the Commission’s determination regarding the domestic...more
On February 21, 2024, Judge Rakoff (S.D.N.Y) granted a defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs in Carnegie Institute of Technology v. Fenix Diamonds. The Carnegie Institution for Science and its patent licensee, the...more
In a split decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s award of more than $5 million in attorneys’ fees, finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion in finding the...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - MALVERN PANALYTICAL INC. v. TA INSTRUMENTS-WATERS LLC [OPINION] (2022-1439, 11/1/2023) (Prost, Hughes, and Cunningham) - Prost, J. The Court vacated the district court’s...more
In re PersonalWeb Technologies LLC, Appeals Nos. 2021-1858, -1859, -1860 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the question before the...more
This case addresses the proper standard for an appeal of a discretionary decision by a successor judge as well as requests for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and certain circumstances that do not make a case...more
Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2263, -2264, -2265, -2266 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2023) In an appeal from a stipulated judgment of noninfringement and invalidity following an adverse claim construction...more
One of the tools available in the real estate litigation attorney’s toolbox is a lis pendens, also known as a notice of pending action. A lis pendens is a document recorded at the County Recorder’s Office providing...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
The Federal Circuit in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 20-1685, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Sep. 28, 2021) addressed the standards for willful infringement and enhanced damages, and provided insights on litigation tactics...more
Mobility Workx, LLC v. Unified Patents, LLC, Appeal No. 2020-1441 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2021) - In this week’s Case of the Week, a panel of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit considered, and rejected, new...more
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions KANNUU PTY LTD. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. [OPINION] (2021-1638, 10/7/21) (Newman, Prost, Chen) - Chen, J. Denying motion for preliminary injunction. Patentee sought to compel...more
Rain Computing, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1646, -1656 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 2, 2021) - Our Case of the Week focuses on the issue of indefiniteness, and particularly, terms that are construed as...more
APPLICATION OF NHK/FINTIV ANALYSIS CONTINUES TO EVOLVE - The Board’s application of its precedential NHK and Fintiv decisions to deny petitions based on parallel litigation continues to develop. The Board recently...more
Last week, Seth Lloyd and I noticed that there had been two more Rule 36s in appeals without oral argument from the Federal Circuit’s November sitting. And then yesterday, Bloomberg’s Perry Cooper tweeted that two more...more
A federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia granted defendant Amazon.com, Inc.’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, ordering plaintiff Innovation Sciences, LLC to pay over $700,000 in fees that accrued...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Eko Brands, LLC v. Adrian Rivera Maynez Enterprises, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2018-2215, et al. (Fed. Cir. Jan. 13, 2020) - In this appeal from the Western District of Washington, the Federal Circuit...more
BLACKBIRD TECH LLC v. HEALTH IN MOTION LLC - Before Wallach, Prost, and Hughes. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed a finding that a frivolous...more
This post summarizes some of the significant developments in the Eastern District of Texas and the Northern District of Texas for the month of September 2019....more
Addressing the appeal of a judgment that four US patents were infringed and not invalid, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit: • Found waiver regarding a claim construction issue • Found direct infringement...more
On April 25, 2019, in Int’l Designs Corp., LLC, et. al. v. Hair Art Int’l, Inc., Judge George H. Wu in the Central District of California denied Hair Art’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Judge Wu concluded...more
Before Prost, Dyk, and Wallach. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida. Summary: Asserting the district court’s claim construction prevented consideration of additional prior art,...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a denial of attorneys’ fees under 35 USC § 285 and cautioned future litigants to “tread carefully” in criticizing district courts. Spineology, Inc. v. Wright Medical...more