News & Analysis as of

Damages › Octane Fitness v. ICON

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

10th Circuit Declines to be the Exception and Follows Patent Act Standard for Prevailing Party Attorney’s Fees in “Exceptional...

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

Since the Supreme Court’s 2014 decision in Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness, Inc., district courts have had expanded discretion to award prevailing party attorney’s fees in “exceptional cases” under the Patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Attorneys’ Fee Decision Should put Louis Vuitton in a Good Mood, but will it Gain a Sense of Humor?

Knobbe Martens on

In December, the Second Circuit ruled that My Other Bag (MOB) was not liable for infringing Louis Vuitton’s trademarks and copyrights because MOB’s bags were a parody of the luxury giant....more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - August 2017

Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

In SCA v. First Quality Baby Products, the Supreme Court holds that laches should not be available as a defense in patent cases, refusing to concur with the Circuit’s en banc holding that the Patent Act’s 6-year limitation on...more

Locke Lord LLP

Are Patent Opinions Again Necessary?

Locke Lord LLP on

Patent opinions are no longer necessary to avoid an inference at trial that the opinion would have been unfavorable, but, in view of the recent Supreme Court decisions in Halo and Octane Fitness they may be advisable upon...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | March 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Under O2 Micro, a District Court Must Provide a Claim Construction if the Parties Dispute the Meaning of a Claim Term - In Eon Corp. IP Holdings LLC v. Silver Springs Networks, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1237, the Federal...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Trolls v. Pirates: Supreme Court Oral Argument Reviewing Enhanced Damages

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Earlier today, the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in two related cases: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. (Supreme Court docket number 14-1513) and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. (Supreme Court docket...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court to Review Federal Circuit Standard for Treble Damage Awards Under § 284 - Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse...

McDermott Will & Emery on

Taking its first IP cases of the current session, the Supreme Court has granted certiorari in two § 284 enhanced fee award patent cases: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., S.Ct. No. 14-1513 (Oct. 19, 2015) and...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

SCOTUS to Hear a Duo on Willful Patent Infringement

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on

On Monday, October 19, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari to hear two patent infringement cases on the issue of willfulness. The first case is Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer Inc. and the second one is Halo Elecs., Inc....more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Attorneys' Fees Awarded to Small Business Patent Owner to Advance Considerations of "Compensation and Deterrence"

Foley & Lardner LLP on

A recent case in the District of Connecticut demonstrates that courts may be more willing to award attorneys’ fees to a small plaintiff, encouraging such a plaintiff to protect its patent when it is the plaintiff’s “primary...more

10 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide