6 Key Takeaways | Patent Opinions – New Developments and Pitfalls
Willful Patent Infringement: Understanding and Preparing for Claims
In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a decision in the case of Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. making it easier for courts to find willful infringement in patent cases and award enhanced damages. Prior to...more
Historically, patent owners have pled willful infringement in an effort to support the collection of enhanced damages from an infringer. Typically, if there was willful infringement the damages were enhanced and often...more
This article considers district court decisions on enhanced damages issued within the first six months after Halo, particularly focusing on the factors that influence whether enhanced damages are ultimately awarded. Our...more
Withdrawal of Claims During Prosecution Can Trigger Prosecution History Estoppel In UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2015-1957, the Federal Circuit held that prosecution estoppel can apply even...more
Federal Circuit After Stryker/Halo - Why it matters: On June 13, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court decided the consolidated cases of Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. and Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. and, as...more
On remand from the Supreme Court, the Federal Circuit vacated the judgment of the district court that defendant ION Geophysical Corporation (ION) does not willfully infringe the asserted patents of plaintiff WesternGeco...more
The U.S. patent system has long struggled to strike a balance that both encourages patent rights and prevents patent abuse. Finding that balance requires giving patent owners the right amount of patent enforcement power,...more
In its first post-Halo decision on willful infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit unanimously affirmed the district court’s award of enhanced damages in WBIP LLC v. Kohler Co., Case Nos. 15-1038; -1044...more
Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its quarterly newsletter. The newsletter covers a number of current IP topics, including a look at the America Invents Act, five years in; the U.S. International Trade...more
Supreme Court Expands Discretion to Award Enhanced Damages for Patent Infringement and Eliminates the Federal Circuit’s ‘Seagate Test’ - In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court...more
A recent order from the District of Massachusetts sheds light on how the Supreme Court’s June 2016 decision in Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics is being interpreted by the district courts. The Memorandum and Order by...more
Supreme Court Abolished Federal Circuit's Test for Willfulness - On June 13, 2016, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 579 U.S. ___ (2016), the Supreme Court unanimously abrogated the Federal Circuit’s...more
Several recent court decisions in patent infringement actions reflect the significant impact of the Supreme Court's ruling in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., which dramatically altered the landscape for...more
Patent holders have faced a number of new challenges to successfully enforce their patent rights over the last several years. The creation and implementation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and inter partes review...more
A recent report and recommendation issued in the District of Massachusetts is one of the first cases to interpret – and arguably, to extend – the Supreme Court’s recent decision on willful infringement, Halo Electronics, Inc....more
On June 13, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court again reversed a decision of the Federal Circuit—the Circuit specially designated to hear all patent appeals—this time, in articulating the test for determining whether to award...more
Patent infringement plaintiffs and defendants alike fret over enhanced damages: Section 284 of the Patent Act, the basis for enhanced damages, provides that a court may grant a damages award up to three times actual damages....more
The Supreme Court of the United States traced two centuries of analysis related to enhanced damages in patent cases to conclude that the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s two-part test, announced nearly a decade...more
On June 13, 2016 Chief Justice Roberts delivered a unanimous decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Halo v. Pulse on the question of when enhanced damages can be awarded for patent infringement. This decision reversed...more
On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in two consolidated cases (Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer) effectively lowering the standard for obtaining enhanced damages in...more
In a relatively rare “pro-patent” decision, the U.S. Supreme Court earlier this week unanimously overruled the Federal Circuit’s so-called Seagate standard for finding willful patent infringement and awarding enhanced...more
On Monday, in a significant victory for patent owners, the U.S. Supreme Court swept away the Federal Circuit’s “inelastic” framework for assessing enhanced patent damages and found that 35 U.S.C. § 284 means what it says:...more
On June 13, 2016, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 579 U.S. ___ (2016), the Supreme Court unanimously abrogated the Federal Circuit’s 2007 decision in In re Seagate Tech., LLC, 497 F.3d 1360 (Fed. Cir....more
In recent years, the Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected the Federal Circuit’s strict tests concerning monetary relief in patent cases in favor of more fluid standards that commit discretion to the district courts. In...more
In a unanimous decision, on June 13, 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the CAFC Seagate “objective recklessness” standard and appeal criteria. As is its habit, the Supreme Court has thus taken away relatively clear...more