Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | AI and Your Patent Management, Strategy & Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Hilary Preston, Vice Chair at Vinson & Elkins, Discusses Energy Innovation: Protecting Your Intellectual Property Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
(Podcast) The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
(Podcast) The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
A Conversation with Phil Hamzik
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
4 Tips for Protecting Your AI Products
Innovating with AI: Ensuring You Own Your Inventions
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
In Actavis v. U.S., a case at the intersection of tax law and patent law, the Federal Circuit held that generic drug companies’ Hatch-Waxman litigation expenses are “ordinary and necessary business expenses” and can be...more
Third-party IPRs can moot previously favorable decisions and leave a previously successful party to bear its own costs. On October 16, 2024, Judge Rodney Gilstrap denied the plaintiff’s Motion to be Confirmed as the...more
For those who have not had a chance to attend one of our CLE presentations on Litigation Funding Disclosure, this IAM article provides a glimpse of the complex landscape for defendants seeking discovery on litigation funding...more
The UPC decides that the defendant’s financial situation and location matter. On 30 October 2023, the Munich Central Division of the UPC (the Court) issued an order stating that NanoString must provide security to Harvard...more
This case addresses whether attorney’s fees are warranted due to an inequitable conduct and conflict of interest defense. Background - UCANN filed suit in the District of Colorado in July 2018, accusing Pure Hemp of...more
On June 1, 2023, the new European Unified Patent Court (UPC) will open its doors, and enforcement of European patents in (currently) 17 contract member states will be possible with one action. This series of articles –...more
Third-party litigation financing (TPLF) is an arrangement by which plaintiffs finance litigation costs through a non-party, typically a private firm that obtain funds from other investors. The commercial goal for a funder is...more
A split panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the structure and functions of the Patent Trial & Appeal Board (PTAB) survived yet another constitutional challenge, this time based on the...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit updated its earlier opinion to remove language ascribing motive to a prolific inventor’s actions before the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO). Hyatt v. Hirshfeld, Case Nos....more
The US Tax Court determined that a pharmaceutical manufacturer’s legal expenses incurred to defend against a patent infringement suit were eligible for an immediate deduction as ordinary and necessary business expenses, while...more
Abbreviated new drug (ANDA) applicant Amneal petitioned for an inter partes review (IPR) of Almirall’s patent listed in the Food and Drug Administration’s (FDA) Orange Book for a prescription drug to treat acne. Almirall...more
In Amneal Pharmaceuticals LLC v. Almirall, LLC, the Federal Circuit recently found 35 U.S.C. § 285 did not authorize the Court awarding attorney’s fees for conduct occurring at the PTAB. No. 2020-1106, 2020 WL 2961939, at *2...more
In Amneal Pharmacueticals LLC v. Almirall, LLC, the Federal Circuit professed to address a question it had not considered before: whether attorney's fees and a exceptional case determination was available for fees and costs...more
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
Please see full Chart below for more information....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court finding that an accused infringer was the “prevailing party” entitled to fees under Rule 54(d)(1) when the patent owner’s claim was dismissed for...more
B.E. TECHNOLOGY, L.L.C. v. FACEBOOK, INC. Before Lourie, Plager, and O’Malley. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Tennessee. Summary: A decision on the merits is not a prerequisite...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - HZNP Medicines LLC v. Actavis Laboratories UT, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2017-2149, et al. (Fed. Cir. Oct. 10, 2019) - In a lengthy decision following a bench trial, the Court addressed a matter of...more
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
On Monday, the Supreme Court of the United States granted certiorari in Iancu v. NantKwest to resolve a circuit split concerning “expenses” a patent applicant must pay when challenging the United States Patent and Trademark...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Wallach, Linn and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Summary: In determining whether to award sanctions under 28 U.S.C. § 1927,...more
The USPTO has commenced a fee-setting process for fee adjustments it expects to implement in January 2021. While many fee changes are modest (~5%), the USPTO proposes significant increases to patent trial fees and two new...more
This decision should be a welcome development for patent applicants seeking review. On July 27, 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its en banc opinion in NantKwest, Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-1794...more
Federal Circuit Summary - En Banc (excl. Chen), Opinion for the court filed by Stoll, joined by Newman, Lourie, Moore, O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District...more
On July 27, 2018, the Federal Circuit ruled that a patent applicant’s obligation to pay the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) “expenses” for district court proceedings to review patent application rejections does not...more