Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 148: Listen and Learn -- Claim and Issue Preclusion (Civil Procedure)
JONES DAY TALKS®: Women in IP: 2020 in Review and a Look Toward 2021
The District Court for the Northern District of California recently granted a defendant’s motion to bifurcate, ordering that issues related to PGR estoppel should be decided in a bench trial, while the remaining issues in the...more
Following a dismissal on the pleadings, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the defendant’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 after concluding that the asserted patent was...more
In a recent patent infringement case, Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y.) awarded attorneys’ fees under the Patent Act because the case was “exceptional,” but denied fees under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and the court’s inherent authority...more
The “alter ego” doctrine has been a frequent topic of posts on the Money and Dirt and LLC Jungle blogs... Normally, a court will treat a business entity and its liabilities as separate and distinct from its owners. The...more
The Federal Circuit’s recent decision last week in Inland Diamond Prods. Co. v. Cherry Optical Inc., offers an important reminder for patent litigators: a PTAB’s factual finding in an inter partes review (IPR) does not...more
Hernandez v. Baird Mandalas Brockstedt & Federico, LLC, 2025 WL 1304194 (Del. May 6, 2025) - The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed the Superior Court’s dismissal of the plaintiffs’ legal malpractice claims under the collateral...more
Returning to its decision in Kroy IP, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a petition for panel rehearing and rehearing en banc, leaving undisturbed its prior opinion that collateral estoppel does not apply...more
The Federal Circuit recently issued a decision in the ongoing dispute in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., addressing the collateral estoppel effect of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions on subsequent...more
On July 9, 2025, Judge J. Paul Oetken (S.D.N.Y) found that collateral estoppel barred plaintiff Linfo IP, LLC from relitigating the validity of its asserted patent and dismissed Linfo’s infringement claims against Aero...more
Key Points: The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has clarified that the standard of proof required for a finding of attorney misconduct is “clear and convincing evidence.” Attorney disciplinary matters “are in the nature of...more
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - Hamilton v. US Att’y Gen - immigration... Florida Supreme Court - Tallahassee - In re R Reg Fla Bar - amended rules...more
In a February 10, 2025 order, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals rejected the application of the collateral estoppel doctrine to patent claims asserted in a district court infringement action where other claims in the same...more
The Federal Circuit recently refused to apply collateral estoppel to claims of a patent asserted in district court litigation based on a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision finding similar claims from the same...more
In the recent disciplinary matter of ODC v. Anonymous, 2025 WL 524221 (Pa. Feb. 12, 2025), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court established the standard applicable to attorney disciplinary matters, expressly holding that the...more
Kroy IP Holdings, LLC sued Groupon, Inc., alleging infringement of 13 claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,061,660 (“’660 patent’), which relates to incentive programs over computer networks. Those claims were invalidated via...more
The Retreat at Charleston National Country Club Home Owners Ass’n, Inc. v. Winston Carlyle Charleston National, LLC, S.C. App. Case No. 2021-001050, Opinion No. 6099 (Feb. 12, 2025) Key Takeaways: Case Summary (for those of...more
In Kroy IP Holdings v. Groupon, The Federal Circuit issued a decision that should come as a comfort to patent owners, addressing the interplay between decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) in inter partes...more
U.S. Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals - USA v. Murat - sentencing - Johnson v. Fla DOC - Confrontation Clause, medical report - US Sugar v. US Army Corp of Eng’rs - administrative challenge, Everglades...more
In this edition of The Precedent, we outline the Federal Circuit's decision in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc. Overview - The Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) finding of...more
In HD Silicon Solutions LLC V. Microchip Technology Inc., Appeal No. 23-1397, the Federal Circuit held that all but one patent claim were invalid as obvious because the claimed material, as properly construed, was disclosed...more
South Carolina contractors need to be aware of a recent decision by the South Carolina Court of Appeals that clarifies the landscape for indemnity provisions in contracts and introduces critical consideration regarding the...more
On February 10, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., reversing and remanding a district court ruling that had dismissed Kroy’s patent...more
The US Court Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that despite a Patent Trial & Appeal Board determination that certain challenged patent claims were unpatentable based on a preponderance of the evidence standard, the patent...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - HD SILICON SOLUTIONS LLC v. MICROCHIP TECHNOLOGY INC. [OPINION] (2023-1397, 2/6/2025) (Lourie, Stoll, Cunningham) - Lourie, J. The Board affirmed the Final Written...more
On February 10, the Federal Circuit held in Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Groupon, Inc. that a final written decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) concluding that certain claims are unpatentable does not prevent the...more