What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Art of Teaching Complex Technology in Patent Litigation - IMS Insights Podcast Episode 67
The Briefing: Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
Podcast: The Briefing - Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
5 Key Takeaways | How to Effectively Leverage the Chinese Patent System
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
Donation (Disclosure-Dedication) Doctrine in China’s Patent Litigation
6 Key Takeaways | Patent Opinions – New Developments and Pitfalls
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Kidon IP War Stories: David Cohen & Daryl Lim
Protecting the PB&J – Preserving IP Rights from Concept to Market
Patent Marking in China
Webinar: Orange Book listing sheets under the microscope
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld a decision on enhanced damages and prejudgment interest, concluding that the district court correctly applied the appropriate standard for enhanced damages in accordance...more
Epaned® (enalapril maleate) - Case Name: Silvergate Pharms., Inc. v. Bionpharma Inc., Civ. Nos. 18-cv-1962, 19-cv-1067, 2024 WL 4417104 (D. Del. Oct. 4, 2024) (Goldberg, J.) Drug Product and Patent(s)-in-Suit: Epaned®...more
The District Court of Delaware recently confirmed an award of $9.15 million in attorney’s fees and costs to defendant Elysium Health, Inc. (Elysium), resulting from what it determined to be insubstantial litigation positions...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. CYTIVA BIOPROCESS R&D AB v. JSR CORP. [OPINION] (2023-2074, 12/4/2024) (Prost, Taranto, Hughes) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed the PTAB’s IPR determination that...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to use its inherent power to award deterrence sanctions for filing a nuisance patent infringement lawsuit. PS Products Inc. v. Panther...more
Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: USPTO Director Vidal to Step Down - On November 12, Under Secretary of...more
Inline Plastics Corp. (“Inline”) filed a lawsuit against Lacerta Group, LLC (“Lacerta”), alleging infringement of several patents related to tamper-resistant containers and methods of making such containers using thermoformed...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - 1. BACKERTOP LICENSING LLC [OPINION] (23-2367, 23-2368, 24-1016, 24-1017 Prost, Hughes, and Stoll) - Hughes, J. The Court affirmed the District Court’s orders (1)...more
In Dragon Intellectual Property LLC v. DISH Network LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed an “exceptional” set of circumstances concerning the recovery of attorney fees in district court litigation...more
In an action involving manufacturers of a self-sealing dining mat for toddlers, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s finding that the defendants were barred from obtaining relief on...more
On February 21, 2024, Judge Rakoff (S.D.N.Y) granted a defendant’s motion for attorney’s fees and costs in Carnegie Institute of Technology v. Fenix Diamonds. The Carnegie Institution for Science and its patent licensee, the...more
Director Vidal recently issued sanctions against OpenSky Industries (“OpenSky”) for attempted extortion during settlement negotiations and abuse of the IPR process for US Patent 7,725,759 and awarded $413,264.15 to VLSI...more
Can a litigation financier controlling decisions from behind the scenes be held liable for fees under Section 285? The Federal Circuit may weigh in on this issue during oral arguments in Dragon Intellectual Property v. Dish...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - MALVERN PANALYTICAL INC. v. TA INSTRUMENTS-WATERS LLC [OPINION] (2022-1439, 11/1/2023) (Prost, Hughes, and Cunningham) - Prost, J. The Court vacated the district court’s...more
In re PersonalWeb Technologies LLC, Appeals Nos. 2021-1858, -1859, -1860 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the question before the...more
This case addresses the proper standard for an appeal of a discretionary decision by a successor judge as well as requests for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and certain circumstances that do not make a case...more
Launching a product, even a simple one, can be lucrative, but also presents risks, not the least of which is patent infringement. Before selling a product, it is wise to invest in patent clearance advice, which includes an...more
The Federal Circuit passed on Pure Hemp’s ask for attorney fees and sanctions in United Cannabis, Corp. v. Pure Hemp Collective Inc., No. 22-1363 (Fed. Cir. May 8, 2023). Agreeing with the district court, the appellate panel...more
In 2018, United Cannabis Corporation (“UCANN”) sued Pure Hemp Collective (“Pure Hemp”) for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 9,730,911 (the “‘911 patent”), entitled “Cannabis Extracts and Methods of Preparing and Using the...more
UNITED CANNABIS CORPORATION V. PURE HEMP COLLECTIVE INC. Before Lourie, Cunningham, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Summary: The Federal Circuit affirmed the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, prioritizing specific allegations in the complaint over disclosures in exhibits to the complaint, reversed and remanded a district court decision dismissing an original...more
Phillip Morris can’t seem to catch its breath. As discussed in a previous post, just a few weeks ago the Federal Circuit upheld the ITC’s ban on the importation and sale of Phillip Morris’s line of heated tobacco and...more
Sequoia Technology, LLC v. Dell, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2263, -2264, -2265, -2266 (Fed. Cir. April 12, 2023) In an appeal from a stipulated judgment of noninfringement and invalidity following an adverse claim construction...more
Sometimes just because the rules permit something doesn’t mean doing it is a good idea. As our latest case-of-the-week shows, the result could be an award of attorney fees. Case of the week: Realtime Adaptive Streaming...more
Realtime Adaptive Streaming LLC v. Netflix, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-1484, -1485, -1518, -1519 (Fed. Cir. July 27, 2022) - In our Case of the Week, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concisely affirmed an award of...more