News & Analysis as of

Evidence Intellectual Property Protection

Pagefreezer

Spoliation, Sanctions, and Staying Social Media Savvy

Pagefreezer on

Social media has changed the way we share ideas, the way we get our news, the way we make purchases, and the way we conceptualize ourselves and our community. It has changed the way we keep in touch with our friends and...more

Bennett Jones LLP

Kissing Registration Goodbye: Deficient Online Survey Evidence Cannot Save Application for SWISSKISS

Bennett Jones LLP on

Survey evidence can be used in trademark disputes to establish consumer perception and brand power. A recent Federal Court decision provides guidance on factors that may influence the admissibility of online survey evidence....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Is Evidence of All Claimed Elements in Prior Art Enough? Not Without Motivation to Combine

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board obviousness decision, finding that disclosure in the prior art of all recited claim elements across multiple references, without more,...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Importance of Reasonable Particularity in a Doctrine of Equivalents Argument

In VLSI Technology LLC v. Intel Corporation, No. 22-1906 (Fed. Cir. 2023), VLSI sued Intel for infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,523,373 (the “’373 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 7,725,759 (the “’759 patent”). After a jury...more

Linda Liu & Partners

Solve the dilemma in presenting evidence by applying to the court for collecting evidence and issuing an order to produce...

Linda Liu & Partners on

Judgment Gist - In a civil intellectual property lawsuit, if the applicant applies to the court to order the other party to produce documentary evidence, it should clarify the factum probandum in its claims. When...more

DRI

Whose Data Is It Anyway? Defending Client Information after the Case Ends

DRI on

Imagine you’re back at school with a box full of Legos. Chances are you had a teacher that insisted on everyone sharing their pieces when playing together. Some kids might need the bigger pieces, she said, while others might...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

[Webinar] Developments in IPR Estoppel - December 5th, 1:00 pm - 2:00 pm EST

Director Jason A. Fitzsimmons and Counsel Richard A. Crudo will present the “Developments in IPR Estoppel” webinar on Tuesday, December 5, 2023, at 1:00 PM ET. The possibility of being estopped from asserting prior art in...more

Locke Lord LLP

How Much Claim Construction ‎Significance? – Extrinsic Evidence and Significant Figures

Locke Lord LLP on

In almost every claim construction, the courts make their claim construction ruling largely based on the intrinsic evidence – the claims, specification and prosecution history. However, the Federal Circuit (CAFC) bucked this...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Cyntec Company, Ltd. v. Chilisin Electronics Corp., Chilisin America Ltd. Nos. 2022-1873, (Fed. Cir. October 16, 2023)

This case is primarily about the Daubert standard as applied to expert testimony on damages. The Federal Circuit reversed the Northern District of California’s admission of expert testimony on damages, which relied on...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - August 2023 #3

Volvo Penta of the Americas, LLC v. Brunswick Corp., Appeal No. 2022-1765 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 24, 2023) In its only precedential patent case of the week, the Federal Circuit held the Patent Trial and Appeal Board erred in...more

American Conference Institute (ACI)

[Event] 21st Annual Life Sciences IP Summit - September 27th - 28th, Munich, Germany

Hosted by C5 Group, the 21st Annual Life Sciences IP Summit returns for another exciting year with curated programming with speakers from the pharma, biotech and medical device industries that will provide practical insights...more

International Lawyers Network

Pre-Determined Indemnification Regulations For Trademark Infringement Actions In Colombia

When litigating trademark infringement cases in Colombia, the issue arises as to how the plaintiff should provide valid evidence of the damages arising from the unauthorized use of a trademark, as well as to what admissible...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Second Circuit Vacates Jury Award on Grounds that Damages Theory Lacked Evidence

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

On May 25, 2023, the Second Circuit issued an opinion in Syntel Sterling Best Shores Mauritius Ltd. v. TriZetto Group, Inc., No. 21-1370 (2d Cir. 2023) that provides guidance regarding recoverable damages in trade secret...more

Knobbe Martens

Low-Bar for Corroboration

Knobbe Martens on

MEDTRONIC, INC. v. TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.A.R.L. Before Moore, Lourie, and Dyk. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board - Summary: Federal Circuit confirms low bar for evidence corroborating prior inventorship...more

Hicks Johnson

How Should Litigators Establish Evidence in Trade Secret Cases? Part Three: Evidentiary Concerns

Hicks Johnson on

Like any other type of litigation, trade secret cases rise or fall on the strength of the evidence that can be put before the factfinder. Yet before a lawyer can focus on what evidence they have to make or defend their case,...more

Jones Day

Tactical Decision Leads to Supplemental Information Request Denial

Jones Day on

Parties before the PTAB should be careful to submit supplemental materials as soon as practicable. In Extractiontek Sales v. Gene Pools Tech., the PTAB denied a Patent Owner’s motion to submit a deposition transcript from a...more

Hicks Johnson

How Should Litigators Establish Evidence in Trade Secret Cases? Part Two: Damages

Hicks Johnson on

As discussed in part one of this series, trade secret litigation presents a minefield of evidentiary challenges. But while the act of misappropriation is often simple enough to demonstrate, calculating the precise value of...more

Hicks Johnson

How Should Litigators Establish Evidence in Trade Secret Cases? Part One: Liability

Hicks Johnson on

In recent years, juries have returned verdicts in trade secret disputes of $2.04 billion, $570 million, $152 million, and $105 million. The enormity of these verdicts reflect the importance the modern economy places on trade...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions: Google LLC v. IPA Technologies Inc., 34 F.4th 1081...

Google petitioned for IPR of two patents owned by IPA. Each of the asserted grounds relied on the Martin reference. Martin lists as authors the two inventors of the challenged patents and a third person, Dr. Moran. During...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

Linda Liu & Partners

Application of Obstruction of Evidence Production Rule in Patent Infringement Disputes (II)

Linda Liu & Partners on

III. Application of Obstruction of Evidence Production Rule in Patent Infringement Judgment - In the practice of patent infringement disputes, especially the infringement cases involving manufacturing equipment and BtoB...more

Haug Partners LLP

Foresight in Patent Litigation: How Adherence to Local Rules Can Make or Break a Case

Haug Partners LLP on

On September 7, 2022, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in Arendi S.A.R.L v. LG Electronics, Inc., offering an important reminder to patent litigators of the necessity of following the...more

Knobbe Martens

Expert Testimony That Contradicts Patent Specification Fails to Create a Genuine Issue of Fact in a Patent Eligibility Dispute

Knobbe Martens on

CAREDX, INC. V. NATERA, INC. Before Lourie, Bryson, and Hughes - Summary: Expert testimony that steps of challenged patent claims were unconventional failed to preclude summary judgment of ineligibility where...more

Knobbe Martens

Is Evidence of Generic Industry Skepticism Enough to Preclude a Finding of a Motivation to Combine?

Knobbe Martens on

AURIS HEALTH, INC., v. INTUITIVE SURGICAL OPERATIONS, INC., Before Dyk, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Summary: Evidence of generic industry skepticism cannot, by itself, form...more

Knobbe Martens

Sounding Off: Prosecution Disclaimer Requires Unambiguous Intrinsic Evidence

Knobbe Martens on

GENUINE ENABLING TECHNOLOGY LLC V. NINTENDO CO., LTD - Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the Western District of Washington. Summary: A finding of prosecution disclaimer must be supported by an unambiguous...more

94 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 4

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