False Claims Act Insights - The Mathematics of Nuclear FCA Verdicts
Bar Exam Toolbox Podcast Episode 316: Spotlight on Torts (Part 1 – Negligence)
The Future of Litigation: Adapting to the Era of Nuclear Verdicts
The Impact of the Horn Case on RICO - RICO Report Podcast
Law School Toolbox Podcast Episode 497: Listen and Learn -- Incidental, Reliance, and Restitution Damages (Contracts)
Podcast - Ohio State Senator Has a Bone to Pick with Court Ruling on Boneless Wings
False Claims Act Insights - Assessing the Fallout from a Thermonuclear FCA Verdict
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
The Briefing: Supreme Court Holds Copyright Damages Can Go Beyond 3 Years (Podcast)
The Briefing: Supreme Court Holds Copyright Damages Can Go Beyond 3 Years
Supreme Court to Settle Circuit Split Regarding RICO Damages Arising From Personal Injuries — RICO Report Podcast
RICO Damages — RICO Report Podcast
(Podcast) The Briefing: How Far Back Can You Go: Supreme Court to Decide Circuit Split on Recovery of Copyright Damages
The Briefing; How Far Back Can You Go: Supreme Court to Decide Circuit Split on Recovery of Copyright Damages
SDNY Chooses “Time Approach” to Calculating Lease Termination Damages Collectible Against a Bankrupt Estate
Using Expert Witnesses in FCRA Cases - FCRA Focus
#WorkforceWednesday: How to Pursue Damages in Trade Secrets Litigation - Employment Law This Week® - Spilling Secrets Podcast
How Do You Measure The Economic Value of Ecosystems?
Podcast: Discussing Florida Tort Reform with William Large and Tiffany Roddenberry
6 Key Takeaways | Presenting Damages in International Arbitration
On August 14, 2025, Judge McMahon (S.D.N.Y.) issued a Final Judgment in favor of plaintiff Geigtech East Bay LLC (“Geigtech”) in the total amount of $5,951,153.15. See Geigtech E. Bay LLC v. Lutron Elecs. Co, Case No....more
Sixty-seven patent infringement trials reached a jury verdict in 2024. Of these 67 patent infringement verdicts, thirty-one (approximately 46%) were a complete patent owner win on all patent infringement and validity issues. ...more
On November 12, 2024, Judge McMahon (S.D.N.Y.) granted defendant Lutron Electronics Co.’s motion for sanctions against plaintiff Geigtech East Bay LLC, and precluded Geigtech from presenting any theory of damages on retrial...more
The sufficiency of evidence required to support a denial of a motion for judgment as a matter of law and a motion for a new trial for infringement, willful infringement, and damages....more
Crocs, Inc. v. Double Diamond Distribution, Ltd., Appeal No. 2022-2160 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 3, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit examined whether a district court erred in dismissing false advertising claims...more
On October 2, 2024, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued a precedential opinion reversing-in-part decisions from the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri in Case No....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
March's Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up covers decisions addressing post-verdict JMOL, the point at which cases become exceptional, and the standard for amending invalidity contentions, among other issues....more
Claims With Clerical Errors Can Be Judicially Corrected and Willfully Infringed - In Pavo Solutions LLC v. Kingston Technology Company, Inc., Appeal No. 21-1834, the Federal Circuit held that a court can correct obvious...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court decision correcting a clerical error in a claim. Pavo Solutions LLC v. Kingston Technology Company, Inc., Case Nos. 21-1834 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2022)...more
On September 28, 2021, in a precedential opinion, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc., Nos. 2020-1685, -1704, clarified its decision from a prior appeal in the...more
SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Before LOURIE, O’MALLEY, and STOLL. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Applying the proper test for willful...more
Rain Computing, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2020-1646, -1656 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 2, 2021) - Our Case of the Week focuses on the issue of indefiniteness, and particularly, terms that are construed as...more
The patent marking statute, codified at 35 U.S.C. § 287(a) appears straightforward: Patentees, and persons making, offering for sale, or selling within the United States any patented article for or under them, or importing...more
USAA filed multiple patent infringement lawsuits against Wells Fargo, alleging widespread infringement of USAA’s patented technologies on remote check deposits for mobile banking systems. Last November, a jury in a first case...more
Western Plastics sued Dubose Strapping for infringing a patent covering a material for wrapping rolls of metal coil. Both parties compete in the metal industry and sell a similar wrap...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
Earlier this year, a federal jury in Delaware found that Westinghouse Air Brake d/b/a Wabtec infringed eight patents owned by Siemens Mobility, including finding willful infringement as to two of the patents. The asserted...more
Olaplex sued L’Oreal for infringing U.S. Patent Nos. 9,498,419 and 9,668,954 and asserted related breach of contract and misappropriation of trade secret claims. The patents relate to systems to protect hair from damage...more
Enhanced Damages Under the Patent Act - The Patent Act provides that once infringement has been established, a district court may “increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” 35 U.S.C. § 284. The...more
On Friday, June 28, 2019, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. to decide whether a showing of willfulness is necessary to obtain a defendant’s profits under the Lanham Act....more
Under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), trademark holder who proves infringement may receive as damages an award of profits “subject to the principles of equity.” This phrase has divided the circuit courts going back several decades, with...more
An Illinois jury awarded football equipment manufacturer, Riddell, $5 million in patent damages against Kranos Corporation, doing business as Schutt Sports...more
A petition for writ of certiorari pending before the U.S. Supreme Court asks the Court to decide whether a plaintiff must prove willful infringement to obtain an award of a trademark infringer’s profits for a violation of 15...more
A Nebraska court upheld a jury’s reasonable royalty award of more than $14 million for infringement of Exmark’s patent relating to lawnmower baffles. An appellate court had vacated a previous jury award and remanded the case...more