News & Analysis as of

Halo v Pulse Patents

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: When is a patented product sold “within the United States”?

AEON Law on

Under 35 U.S. Code § 271, a US patent is infringed when someone: without authority makes, uses, offers to sell, or sells any patented invention, within the United States or imports into the United States any patented...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Judge Alsup Certifies Two Hot Button Issues on Standard for Pleading Willful Infringement for Interlocutory Appeal to the CAFC

On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more

Fox Rothschild LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies Standards for Willful Infringement and Enhanced Damages While Reinstating, Affirming-in-Part and...

Fox Rothschild LLP on

By Memorandum Opinion entered on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in SRI International, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Case 20-1685 (Fed. Cir. September 28, 2021), the Federal Circuit...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Eastern District of Michigan Dismisses Willful Infringement Claims for Failure to Allege Infringer's Knowledge and Egregious...

On July 13, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, in Mich. Motor Techs., v. Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft, No. 19-10485, granted Volkswagen’s motion to dismiss Michigan Motor Technologies’...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Responses to Infringement Letters Can Reduce Risk of Willful Infringement

In Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc.,1 the Supreme Court held that 35 U.S.C. Section 284 provides for enhanced damages in egregious cases...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Restoration of (Bad) Faith: The Proper Standard for a Factual Finding of Willful Infringement

Enhanced Damages Under the Patent Act - The Patent Act provides that once infringement has been established, a district court may “increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” 35 U.S.C. § 284. The...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

A Post-Halo World: Companies Need to Be Careful Because Juries Determine Willful Patent Infringement

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

The Supreme Court in Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1923, 1932, 195 L. Ed. 2d 278 (2016), relaxed the standard for a finding of willful patent infringement under 35 USC Section 284. The “objective...more

Fish & Richardson

The Return of Opinions of Counsel in Patent Cases: How Recent Judicial Decisions Have Made Them Relevant Once More

Fish & Richardson on

What should a prudent corporate executive do when he or she becomes aware that the corporation’s activities might be alleged to be infringing a United States patent? Some recent Supreme Court decisions have led to a revival...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit, With Some Significant Cases from 2016

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Chief Judge Stark Rejects Motion for Enhanced Damages Award Due to the Public Interest in the Accused Hepatitis C Virus Treatments

Last month, following a jury verdict in federal district court in Delaware awarding Plaintiff Idenix Pharmaceuticals LLC $2.54 billion in damages—“the largest damages verdict ever returned in a patent [infringement]...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Willful Infringement, Opinion Letters, & Post-Halo Trends

Womble Bond Dickinson on

This short article aims to review recent trends in findings of willful patent infringement and enhanced damages, both in volume of motions made and the success rate of those motions. However, to appreciate current trends...more

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP

Situations When Written Opinions of Counsel Could Spare You a Patent-Related Headache

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Federal Circuit Dismisses Premature Appeal of Pre-Judgment Interest Award

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal brought by an adjudged infringer because the district court had not determined or specified the means for determining the amount of pre-judgment interest....more

Fish & Richardson

Pleading Willfulness – One Year Post-Halo

Fish & Richardson on

Just over a year ago, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1923 (2016). Halo abrogated the Federal Circuit’s two-part willfulness test, which the Federal...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

MBHB Snippets: A review of developments in Intellectual Property Law - Volume 15, Issue 2

Preparing patent applications for examination at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) requires proficient writing, detailed knowledge of the requirements of the Patent Act, and technical acumen. Once a patent...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Halo Effect – Making Angels Out of Infringers?

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit:

The big news this week (and it is particularly big news in Tyler and Marshall, Texas) is that the ?Supreme Court rules that a defendant “resides” for purposes of the patent venue statute only ?where the defendant actually ?is...more

Kilpatrick

5 Top Takeaways: When Is an Opinion of Counsel Required in the New, Post-Halo Environment?

Kilpatrick on

Kilpatrick Townsend Partner James Isbester recently addressed the Intellectual Property Section of the Contra Costa County Bar Association at a CLE event held at the firm’s Walnut Creek office. The presentation, “When Is an...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Illinois Federal Judge Awards Treble Damages and Attorneys’ Fees in Kurt Vonnegut-Fueled Opinion

On February 10, 2017, an Illinois federal judge determined that R-Boc Representatives violated an injunction issued following a jury trial on their alleged patent infringement. In a unique opinion replete with quotations...more

Saul Ewing LLP

Opinions are Critical to Mitigating Patent Damages Post-Halo

Saul Ewing LLP on

Although the Supreme Court’s increased engagement with patent law over the last decade has generally been viewed as positive for parties accused of patent infringement, its recent decision in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

McNees 2016 In Review – Trademarks, Copyrights and Patents

The year 2016 saw interesting and diverse developments in trademark, copyright, trade secret, and patent law. Not only has intellectual property news been in the headlines, but these areas have made it to the Supreme Court....more

Knobbe Martens

This Year’s Top Ten IP Cases

Knobbe Martens on

#10 Design Patent Damages § 289 - Samsung Elecs. Co., v. Apple Inc., 580 U.S. _ (Dec. 6, 2016) - In the case of a multicomponent product, the relevant article of manufacture for arriving at a damages award under...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Stories of 2016: #11 to #15

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its tenth annual list of top patent stories. For 2016, we identified twenty stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | November 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Fraud-Detection Patent Claimed Patent-Ineligible Subject Matter - In FairWarning IP, LLC v. Iatric Systems, Inc., Appeal No. 2015-1985, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s holding that FairWarning’s patent...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | October 2016

Knobbe Martens on

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

81 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