#WorkforceWednesday: New DOL Rules, U.S. Government Changes Race and Ethnicity Categorization - Employment Law This Week®
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 156: Listen and Learn -- The Fourth Amendment: Informer Tips
Control of a Set-aside Entity
With another busy week of arguments last week, the Federal Circuit took a break from issuing precedential decisions. But it still pushed out several non-precedential decisions along with some quick affirmances without...more
If last week’s post on prosecution disclaimer left you hoping for more decisions about the patent application process, you're in luck. This week we're covering another case about patent prosecution and the somewhat rare...more
CompanyCam moved to dismiss plaintiff's complaint because the asserted '872 patent, titled "Device and Method for Embedding and Retrieving Information in Digital Images," was directed to ineligible subject matter. The U.S....more
EKO BRANDS, LLC V. ADRIAN RIVERA MAYNEZ ENTERPRISES, INC. ET. AL. Before Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Reyna dissenting in part. Appeal from the Western District of Washington...more
Chief Judge Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas held that the litigation conduct of defendants Huawei Device USA, Inc. and Huawei Device (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd. (collectively, “Huawei”), in a patent infringement action,...more
Nearly six years ago, the Supreme Court in Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness promulgated a “totality of the circumstances test” for awarding reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party in exceptional cases under 35...more
On April 25, 2019, in Int’l Designs Corp., LLC, et. al. v. Hair Art Int’l, Inc., Judge George H. Wu in the Central District of California denied Hair Art’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Judge Wu concluded...more
Federal Circuit Summaries - Before PROST, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the Southern District of Indiana. Summary: In determining whether a party’s actions were “exceptional” under Octane Fitness, the District...more
In a recent opinion from the District of Massachusetts, Judge Woodlock provided a reading on the mootness of an inequitable conduct counterclaim, where the asserted claims of the thermometer patent at issue were previously...more
After an eight-year battle through the Federal Courts, the fight over attorneys’ fees in Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness has likely reached its end with the Federal Circuit upholding the hotly disputed $1.6 million...more
District Court Abused Discretion in Ignoring Federal Circuit Mandate to Reconsider Attorneys’ Fees Under Octane Fitness - In Adjustacam, LLC v. Newegg, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-1882, the Federal Circuit held that a district...more
To narrow issues and promote settlement in “oversized patent cases,” on July 31, 2017, Chief Judge Leonard Stark of the District of Delaware issued an order that indicates a preference for bellwether trials on all issues for...more
A flurry of activity from various courts this past week on “exceptional cases” under Section 285 of the Patent Act provided notable guidance for practitioners and patent owners, with a particular emphasis on the motivation...more
In Mylan v. Aurobindo the Circuit affirms the grant of a preliminary injunction based upon the infringement of one of the three patents in suit. However, the panel reverses the injunction as to the other two patents based on...more
In SCA v. First Quality Baby Products, the Supreme Court holds that laches should not be available as a defense in patent cases, refusing to concur with the Circuit’s en banc holding that the Patent Act’s 6-year limitation on...more
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
The decision, which affects enhanced patent infringement damages, restores the statutory discretion of district courts, whose exercise of discretion should be channeled by sound legal principles limiting the award of enhanced...more
On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court ruled unanimously, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts, that an award of enhanced damages pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284 should be within the sound discretion of a district court, albeit...more
The aphorism that "[t]he race is not always to the swift nor the battle to the strong, but that's the way to bet," variously attributed to Damon Runyon, Franklin P. Adams, and Hugh Keough, could readily be updated to include...more
Robinson, J. Defendant’s motion to dismiss for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is denied. This is a declaratory judgment action on non-infringement and invalidity of the patent-in-suit. Defendant is an NPE. It had...more
On December 17, 2015, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) ruled that, in light of Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014) (“Alice”), a plaintiff’s position on...more
As 2015 drew to a close, the toll of the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l decision on software and business method patents became apparent. Post Alice, approximately 70% of all patents challenged under 35 U.S.C. § 101 have been...more
Days after the PTAB instituted Inter Partes Review (IPR), Judge Alvin Thompson in the District of Connecticut has stayed a case between Conair and Tre Milano. Conair sued Tre Milano in October 2014, for infringing U.S....more