Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
What You Should Know About Seeking Patent Protection in Vietnam
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Paul Reed Smith
Intellectual Property Portfolio Development for BioTech Startups in the Plant Space [Webinar]
What Is a Patent and How Do I Get One
Monthly Minute | Design Patents
Patent Infringement: Successful Litigation Stays the "Course"
Lashify, Inc. is an American company, with headquarters and employees in the United States, that distributes, markets, and sells eyelash extensions (and cases and applicators for the eyelash extensions) in the United States....more
On March 5, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a decision in Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, No. 23-1245, vacating in part the International Trade Commission’s (ITC) determination that...more
For decades, the ITC’s jurisdictional requirement – known as the domestic industry requirement – effectively shut out innovators from availing themselves of the powerful remedies of the forum, in the form of an exclusion...more
Ten Section 337 Investigations were terminated in the first half of 2024. Of those ten investigations, two involved design patents. Although those investigations ended with the Commission issuing no remedial orders (including...more
The Commission recently reversed the ALJ’s determination that the economic prong of the domestic industry requirement was satisfied and thereby found that there had been no section 337 violation in Certain Replacement...more
Addressing a determination by its chief administrative law judge (CALJ) finding a violation of § 337, the US International Trade Commission reversed and held that the complainant had not satisfied the economic prong of the...more
Section 337 investigations at the ITC have proven to be an efficient and powerful method for Complainants seeking relief from unfair importation. The Commission’s injunctive powers provide an attractive forum for Complainants...more
Last year, in our inaugural issue of “The Year in Review,” we reported that since the landmark jury verdict in the IP litigation between Apple and Samsung in 2012, which awarded more than $1B to Apple for infringement of...more
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more
Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more