All Blog postsIn our previous post, we identified the types of design rights infringement that are actionable. In this part, we will cover the different types of remedies available to rights owners and defenses available to accused infringers.
Read more »Tag: patents
-
An Overview of U.S. Design Rights – Infringement & Enforcement, Part 2 of 2 Posted on: December 19, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
-
An Overview of U.S. Design Rights – Infringement & Enforcement, Part 1 of 2 Posted on: December 17, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyThis two-part blog series provides a primer on the different types of design rights in the United States and their enforcement. Part I will review the various types of infringement, and Part II will address remedies available to rights owners and defenses available to accused infringers. These posts are based on a paper and presentation delivered at the AIPLA’s Design Rights Boot Camp Conference in August 2019.
Read more »
-
Design Patents 101 – Part 2 of 2 Posted on: December 13, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyThis is the second installment of a two-part series on design patents. This part will discuss the design application process and briefly touch on the prosecution of such applications
Read more »
-
Design Patents 101 - Part 1 of 2 Posted on: December 11, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyThis two-part blog series provides a primer on design patents and is based on a presentation delivered at the AIPLA Design Rights Boot Camp in August 2019). Part I will cover the basics of design patents and compare them to other IP protections, such as trademark and copyright.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Agrees to Review Appealability of PTAB Time-Bar Rulings Posted on: June 28, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyOn June 24, 2019, the United States Supreme Court agreed to review the question of whether 35 U.S.C. § 314(d) permits appeal of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) decision to institute an inter partes review (IPR) upon finding that 35 U.S.C. § 315(b)’s 1-year time bar to file an IPR does not apply.
Read more »
-
Claims with Precise Numerical Values - A Cautionary Tale Posted on: June 06, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyOn March 31, 2019, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Cobalt Boats, LLC v. Brunswick Corporation reversed a finding of infringement and vacated a $7.9 million award (inclusive of $2.5 million in attorneys’ fees) previously granted by the Eastern District of Virginia. Cobalt accused Brunswick of infringing their U.S. Patent No. 8,375,880 (the ‘880 patent) directed to a Retractable Step for Boat Swim Platform, issued February 19, 2013.
Read more »
-
Patent Litigation Trends in the Wake of TC Heartland Posted on: April 25, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyIn May 2017, the Supreme Court issued TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, a decision that many expected would significantly limit forum shopping in patent cases. Prior to that case, patentees could file infringement lawsuits in any court with personal jurisdiction over the accused infringer, so most corporations were subject to suit in every district court.
Read more »
-
The Ongoing Evolution Of Patent Venue Posted on: March 21, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyA refresher and update on the ongoing evolution of what constitutes proper venue in a patent case. For over 20 years, venue in a patent case was proper in essentially any court in the United States. That all changed in May 2017 when the Supreme Court held in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Food Grp. Brands, LLC that 28 U.S.C. §1400(b) is the sole and exclusive venue provision for patent infringement actions, and cannot be supplemented by the general venue statute at 28 U.S.C. §1391.
Read more »
-
USPTO Supports “Counterintuitive” Interpretation of AIA in Amicus Brief to Fed Circuit Court of Appeals Posted on: March 07, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & Technology
Oral Arguments Scheduled for Next Week - In a curious legal scenario, the USPTO recently filed an amicus brief at the request of the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, supporting a “counterintuitive” reading of the American Invents Act (AIA). This stems from an interesting argument made by Johnson & Johnson subsidiary company Janssen Oncology, Inc. regarding estoppel under the AIA.
Read more »
-
PTAB Denies Post-Grant Review Request That Relied on Social Media Evidence Posted on: February 04, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyThe Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently denied a request for a post-grant review of a design patent that relied on evidence from social media, casting doubt on the ability to use such evidence when attempting to invalidate patents.
Read more »
-
Supreme Court Rules that AIA Did Not Alter the On-Sale Doctrine Posted on: January 24, 2019 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologyThe U.S. Supreme Court recently ruled that the phrase “or otherwise available to the public” added to 35 U.S.C. § 102 in the America Invents Act in 2011 did not change the “on-sale” doctrine, which provides that patent protection cannot be granted for an invention that was on-sale more than one year before the effective filing date of the patent.
Read more »
-
Federal Circuit Warns Patent Holders to Reconsider Cease and Desist Letters Posted on: December 11, 2018 In: Intellectual Property & TechnologySending a cease and desist letter to a patent infringer should never be taken lightly. In particular, patent-related demand letters can have a profound impact on both substantive and procedural strategic decisions. In its recent decision in Jack Henry & Associated et al v. Plano Encryption Technologies, LLC, the Federal Circuit determined that the mere sending of a cease and desist letter could force the sender to litigate the issues outlined in the letter in the home court of the accused infringer.
Read more »
Blog Search
Featured Posts
- March 20, 2020 OCR Announces HIPAA Telehealth Security Waiver in Response to COVID-19 Pandemic
- March 13, 2020 ALERT: COVID-19 / Coronavirus-Related Ransomware and Phishing Attacks
- March 12, 2020 Colorado Temporarily Requires Employers to Provide Sick Leave While Awaiting COVID-19 Testing
- February 13, 2020 Coronavirus – Employers, Be Smart! Be Prepared!
Blog Tags
9th circuit
ada
agreements
audit
breach notification
business
california
ccpa
colorado
compensation
compliance
confidentiality
congress
consumer notification
copyright
coronavirus
covid-19
cybersecurity
cyber threat
data breach
data privacy
data security
department of labor
design rights
discrimination
eeoc
email
employers
employment agreements
employment law
equal pay
equal pay act
equifax
eu
european union
fbi
fcra
federal circuit
firing
flsa
gdpr
hacking
healthcare
hhsocr
hipaa
hiring
holiday season
human resources
identity theft
illinois
information security
infringement
inter partes review
irs
lay off
legislative alert
malware
marijuana
medical marijuana
microsoft office 365
minimum wage
multi-factor identification
music
new jersey
new mexico
new york
nist security controls
non-competition
non-solicitation
overtime
patent law
patent litigation
patents
payroll
personal data
personal information
phishing
ptab
ransomware
reduction in force
salary
sex discrimination
sexual harassment
social media
statute
supreme court
tax returns
technology
termination
texas
tip credit
trademark
trademark law
trade secrets
uspto
utah
virginia
w2
wages
washington