News & Analysis as of

Litigation Fees & Costs Summary Judgment

Burns & Levinson LLP

Will Your Right to Indemnification Get You Your Attorneys’ Fees?

Burns & Levinson LLP on

Under the so-called “American Rule,” a party that prevails in litigation typically is not entitled to recover the costs, expenses and legal fees it has to expend to secure a judgment in its favor. As such, many business...more

Roetzel & Andress

The New Year Brings A More Relaxed, Pro-Business Summary-Judgment Standard

Roetzel & Andress on

In the waning hours of 2020, the Florida Supreme Court changed Florida’s summary-judgment standard by adopting the much more relaxed federal standard. Although the change does not take effect until May 2021–and even then...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC v. Casper Sleep Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Last month, in Serta Simmons Bedding, LLC v. Casper Sleep Inc., the Federal Circuit vacated a decision by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York granting summary judgment of non-infringement to...more

Fish & Richardson

Supreme Court Holds USPTO Cannot Recover Its Attorney's Fees Under § 145

Fish & Richardson on

On December 11, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the long-standing presumption that parties are responsible for their own attorney’s fees—holding that the “[a]ll expenses of the proceedings” provision of...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Supreme Court: PTO Not Entitled to Attorney’s Fees in District Court Appeals

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a unanimous decision authored by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the US Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) is not entitled to recover its attorney’s fees in an appeal to a district court...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Supreme Court Rejects PTO’s Attempt to Recover Attorneys’ Fees - Intellectual Property News

In Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., the Supreme Court held that the Patent and Trademark Office cannot recover attorneys’ fees against an applicant in a civil action under 35 U.S.C. § 145. An unsuccessful applicant for a patent has...more

Smart & Biggar

5 reasons why Canada is an attractive jurisdiction for trademark litigation

Smart & Biggar on

Brand owners looking to enforce their rights expeditiously (and inexpensively) need look no further than Canada, which offers brand owners a number of tools to obtain relief against infringers and counterfeiters in a...more

Weintraub Tobin

U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down USPTO’s Request For Attorney’s Fees

Weintraub Tobin on

In a unanimous ruling, the U.S. Supreme Court in Peter v. NantKwest, case number 18-801, struck down the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) recent and often-criticized effort to recoup its legal fees – even in cases...more

McCarter & English, LLP

No Fees For You – Supreme Court Says USPTO May Not Recover Attorneys’ Fees For Defending Certain Appeals

McCarter & English, LLP on

Under the so-called American Rule, litigants are normally expected to pay their own attorneys’ fees, win or lose, unless a statute clearly permits or requires fee-shifting. In the underlying litigation in Peter v. NantKwest,...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Supreme Court Issues Unanimous Ruling Denying PTO Attorneys’ Fees for Section 145 Actions

On December 11, 2019, in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., 589 U.S. __ (2019), the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision holding that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) cannot recover the salaries of its legal...more

Hogan Lovells

Supreme Court: USPTO Cannot Collect Attorney’s Fees Under 35 U.S.C. § 145

Hogan Lovells on

The Supreme Court held that the PTO cannot collect attorney’s fees under 35 U.S.C. § 145, which requires challengers of PTAB decisions to pay all expenses of the proceedings....more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Holds “Expenses” Exclude PTO Employee Salaries in Civil Action Challenges Under the Patent Act

Snell & Wilmer on

The Supreme Court unanimously held that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) may not recover the salaries of its legal personnel as “expenses” in a civil action challenging an adverse decision by the PTO under...more

McDermott Will & Emery

SCOTUS Rules PTO Not Entitled to Attorney’s Fees in Appeals to E.D. Virginia from Adverse PTAB Decisions

McDermott Will & Emery on

On December 11, the US Supreme Court held that the US Patent and Trademark Office is not entitled to recover its attorney’s fees in an appeal to the Eastern District of Virgina from an adverse decision of the Patent Trial and...more

Cooley LLP

Alert: Supreme Court Rejects USPTO’s Attempt to Extract Legal Fees for District Court Appeals

Cooley LLP on

On December 11, 2019, the US Supreme Court issued a unanimous order in Peter v. NantKwest, holding that a statute allowing the USPTO to recover "expenses" for appeals of patent refusals to a district court does not allow the...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Supreme Court Decides Peter v. NantKwest, Inc.

On December 11, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., No. 18-801, holding that Section 145 of the Patent Act does not require dissatisfied patent applicants who file a civil action in...more

Robins Kaplan LLP

ANDA Litigation Settlements - Fall 2019

Robins Kaplan LLP on

Please see full Chart below for more information....more

White and Williams LLP

Applying Mighty Midgets, NY Court Awards Legal Expenses to Insureds Which Defeated Insurer’s Coverage Claims

White and Williams LLP on

Is an insured (or putative insured) entitled to recover its legal expenses if it is successful in coverage litigation? In some states, no. In many other states, yes – based on either a statute or common law. In New York...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Nothing Exceptional About Litigation Costs Exceeding Potential Damages

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issue of whether litigation costs that exceed potential damages necessarily render a case exceptional, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision that they did not....more

Pillsbury - Policyholder Pulse blog

Delaware Court Adopts Pillsbury Theory that Shareholder Appraisal Actions Are Covered Securities Claims Under D&O Policies

Pillsbury secured an important victory for its client, Solera Holdings Inc., when Delaware Superior Court Judge Abigail LeGrow held—in a matter of first impression anywhere in the country—that a shareholder appraisal action...more

White & Case LLP

Which jurisdiction? Choosing where to litigate: A jurisdictional overview of the world’s court systems

White & Case LLP on

With ongoing advances in technology and communications, the number of contracting parties looking beyond their local jurisdiction when choosing a dispute resolution forum continues to grow It is easier than ever for...more

Morris James LLP

Court Of Chancery Resolves Allocation Issues In Advancement Case

Morris James LLP on

Weil v. Vereit Operating Partnership LP, C.A. 2017-0613-JTL (February 13, 2018) - This decision clearly sets out how to allocate fees for claims subject to advancement of attorney fees from those that are not covered by an...more

Proskauer - California Employment Law

California Employment Law Notes - September 2017

Jobseeker Website May Be Compelled To Disclose Identity Of Anonymous Posters Who Criticized Employer - ZL Technologies, Inc. v. Does 1-7, 13 Cal. App. 5th 603 (2017) - ZL Technologies brought suit, alleging libel per se and...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | May 2015

Knobbe Martens on

Overly Narrow Statement Of Problem Can Show Reliance On Hindsight - In INSITE VISION INCORPORATED v. SANDOZ, INC., Appeal No. 2014-1065, the Federal Circuit held that enunciating an overly narrow statement of the problem...more

23 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide