News & Analysis as of

Statute of Limitations › Patent Litigation

Statute of Limitations refers to a statute that sets the time period during which a legal claim can be brought. Most statute of limitations laws require individuals to sue at some point during a set period... more +
Statute of Limitations refers to a statute that sets the time period during which a legal claim can be brought. Most statute of limitations laws require individuals to sue at some point during a set period usually commencing from the date of the wrong or injury or the discovery of the wrong or injury. Except for under a limited set of circumstances, if an individual does not file a suit within the specified time period, the law bars them from ever suing on that claim. less -
McDermott Will & Emery

Same Product in Different Packaging May Constitute Separate Market for Antitrust Purposes

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing an issue of first impression, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that two medications that contain the same ingredients but are packaged in different forms constitute separate markets for...more

Knobbe Martens

The Heightened Standard of Proving Induced Infringement

Knobbe Martens on

ROCHE DIAGNOSTICS CORPORATION v. MESO SCALE DIAGNOSTICS, LLC - Before Newman, Prost, and Taranto. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A finding of inducing infringement requires...more

Knobbe Martens

Courts Have No Jurisdiction Over Challenge to PTO Action Before Final Agency Decision

Knobbe Martens on

ODYSSEY LOGISTICS AND TECH. v. IANCU - Before Lourie, Reyna and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia. Summary: PTO procedural actions are not appealable before the...more

Jones Day

Fed. Cir.: Threat of Suit Over Past Infringement Confers Standing

Jones Day on

The Federal Circuit’s April 30, 2020 decision in Grit Energy Solutions, LLC v. Oren Technologies, LLC, No. 2019-1063, held that a former patent infringement defendant who had sold off the allegedly infringing product line and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Flip It and Reverse it: Relation Back Requires Notice of Claims Arising Out of Same Conduct, Transaction, Occurrence

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the application of the relation-back doctrine, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit revived a lawsuit, finding that damages were available because the amended complaint that asserted new patents related...more

Polsinelli

One-Year Time Bar Triggered After the Service of a Complaint, Regardless of Whether the Serving Party Lacked Standing to Sue

Polsinelli on

On August 23, 2019, the Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a precedential opinion relating to the one-year time bar under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b). ...more

Troutman Pepper

A Party Who Lacks Standing Can Still Trigger the Section 315(b) Time Bar

Troutman Pepper on

GoPro, Inc. v. 360Heros, Inc., IPR2018-01754 (Precedential Opinion Panel, August 23, 2019) - Section 315(b) of Title 35 prohibits institution of an IPR where the petition is filed more than one year after service of a...more

Knobbe Martens

Coda Development v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Prost, Wallach, and Hughes. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for N.D. Ohio. Summary: On a Rule 12(b)(6) motion, a district court cannot judicially notice facts that are subject to...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2018

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

Gust, Inc. v. AlphaCap Ventures, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2414 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 28, 2018) In an appeal from a district court decision awarding fees pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1927, the Federal Circuit reversed. The decision makes...more

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P.

Wait For It: "Unreasonable Delay" in Bringing Suit is No Longer a Defense in Patent Cases

Shook, Hardy & Bacon L.L.P. on

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a 7-1 ruling in SCA Hygiene1 that eliminated the common-law defense of laches in patent infringement cases. The Supreme Court reasoned that laches is a “gap-filling doctrine” that does...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | April 2017

Knobbe Martens on

Patentee’s Unnecessarily Broad Prosecution Disclaimer Affirmed by Federal Circuit - In Technology Properties Limited LLC v. Huawei Technologies Co., Ltd., Appeal Nos. 2016-1306, -1307, -1309, -1310, -1311, the Federal...more

Jones Day

En Banc Federal Circuit Considering Whether 1-Year IPR Time Bar Is Appealable

Jones Day on

As we reported earlier, the Federal Circuit decided in January 2017 to rehear en banc whether the PTAB’s findings regarding 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)’s one year bar can be reviewed on appeal. Wi-Fi One v. Broadcom Corp. The...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

A Big Week for Intellectual Property: Supreme Court Decides Patent and Copyright Cases

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC on

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two opinions on intellectual property issues. On March 21, 2017, the Court decided in a 7-1 opinion that laches is no longer a valid defense to a claim of patent infringement occurring...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Litigation Alert: Supreme Court Extends Petrella Rule Barring Laches to Patent Context

Fenwick & West LLP on

Three years ago, in Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc., the Supreme Court held that the equitable defense of laches is not available against copyright claims for damages brought within the Copyright Act’s three-year...more

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets

Laches Limited To Being An Equitable Defense In Patent Cases

Akerman LLP - Marks, Works & Secrets on

In SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, the Supreme Court made plain that laches is merely an equitable defense in patent cases, and will not bar a damage claim if brought within the six year...more

Miller & Martin PLLC

Be Aggressive, B-E Aggressive – SCOTUS Encourages IP Plaintiffs

Miller & Martin PLLC on

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court decided two much anticipated intellectual property cases. Supreme Court Rejects Laches in Patent Infringement Cases - The first, SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag et al. v. First Quality...more

Butler Snow LLP

Mind the “Gap”: Laches No Defense to Claims for Patent Damages

Butler Snow LLP on

Last week the Supreme Court held in a 7-1 decision that the equitable defense of laches is no defense to the legal remedy of patent damages where the infringement occurred during the statutory period of 35 U.S.C. § 286. SCA...more

McDermott Will & Emery

US Supreme Court Knocks out the Equitable Defense of Laches in Patent Law

McDermott Will & Emery on

The Supreme Court of the United States in SCA Hygiene Prods. Aktiebolag, et al. v. First Quality Baby Prods., LLC, et al., has held that the equitable defense of laches is no longer a valid defense to patent damages claims...more

Foley Hoag LLP

Supreme Court Holds Equitable Laches is No Longer Available to Limit Patent Damages

Foley Hoag LLP on

The Supreme Court, in a 7-1 decision written by Justice Alito, has held that laches cannot be invoked as a defense against any claim for damages in a patent case brought within the 6-year limitation on damages prescribed by...more

Polsinelli

Supreme Court Decision Alters Patent Defense Landscape

Polsinelli on

In a highly-anticipated ruling, the Supreme Court held that patent holders can recover damages for infringement even when the patent holders unreasonably delayed filing a lawsuit. In SCA Hygiene Products AB v. First Quality...more

Snell & Wilmer

Supreme Court Holds Laches May Not Bar Patent Infringement Damages Within 6-Year Statutory Limitations Period

Snell & Wilmer on

The United States Supreme Court announced today that laches, an affirmative defense based on an injured party’s delay in bringing suit, may not bar patent infringement damages within the six-year period under § 286 of the...more

Lathrop GPM

Laches No Longer a Defense to Pre-Suit Damages in Patent Infringement Cases

Lathrop GPM on

On March 21, 2017, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a highly anticipated 7-1 decision, held that laches cannot be invoked as a defense against damages for patent infringement occurring within the six-year damages limitation period...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

The Laches Defense Loses Its Grip in Patent Law

Morrison & Foerster LLP on

Until today, laches had been available as a defense in patent litigation without much debate. The defense often arose in the context of demand letters: a patentee would threaten an accused infringer, but would then wait...more

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP

The Supreme Court Strikes Down Laches as a Defense to Patent Infringement

Nutter McClennen & Fish LLP on

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion, SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC, in which it held that laches cannot be used as a defense to a claim of patent infringement. The opinion had...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC (2017)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

The U.S. Supreme Court overturned another Federal Circuit decision today (this one having been decided en banc by the appellate court), in SCA Hygiene Products Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Products, LLC. The outcome was...more

36 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2
Next »

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