Money-Saving Licensing Tips for Startups
From Academia to the Marketplace: The Ins and Outs of University Spinout Licenses with Dan O’Korn
Podcast: The Briefing - How to Avoid Bearing The Risks of A Naked License
The Briefing: How to Avoid Bearing The Risks of A Naked License
Understanding NFTs and Their Legal Implications
Healthcare Tech: How Are Licensing Agreements Bridging the Industry Divide?
Monthly Minute | Licensing Agreements
How To Be A Project Advocate By Diffusing Adjacent Neighbor Tensions
Pennsylvania Tavern Games Licenses
About a year ago, two major tech companies launched Tulip Innovations to manage a pool of 5000+ patents focused on battery technologies, inviting manufacturers to collaborate and take a license. But it's not all fun and games...more
The Delhi High Court’s ruling in Dolby International AB & ANR v. Lava International Limited appears to mark a pivotal shift in India’s approach to the enforcement of standard essential patents (SEPs) wherein the High Court...more
Hubble-Bubble in the Chewing Gum Industry: Big League Chew and Licensee Stretch Arguments in Ongoing Trade Dress Suit - The business relationship between Big League Chew Properties LLC (“Big League Chew”), the owner of...more
On May 21, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, reversed a $20 million damages award against Google LLC in a patent infringement dispute with EcoFactor, Inc. EcoFactor, Inc. v....more
In the United States, a plaintiff must have standing to bring suit in U.S. courts. For patent cases, this means that for a plaintiff to have constitutional standing, the plaintiff must show that it has “an exclusionary right...more
The Federal Circuit's recent en banc decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC has already been touted as a landmark decision on expert damages testimony in patent cases. In EcoFactor, the Federal Circuit weighed in on the...more
On May 21, 2025, the Federal Circuit “reverse[d] the district court’s denial of Google’s motion and remand[ed] for a new trial on damages.” The decision resulted in an 8-2 vote, with Judges Reyna and Stark dissenting. The...more
In an en banc decision in EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the district court abused its discretion by admitting testimony from a damages expert that a lump-sum...more
Whether you’re a startup founder, an innovator, or a multi-national corporation, understanding the strategic importance of patents can transform the way you protect and leverage your intellectual property (IP) portfolio....more
AlexSam, Inc. v. Aetna, Inc., No. 2022-2036 (Fed. Cir. (D. Conn.) Oct. 8, 2024). Opinion by Stark, joined by Lourie and Bryson. AlexSam filed a complaint accusing Aetna of patent infringement based on Aetna’s “Mastercard...more
Reliably Determining Reasonable Royalty Rates from Lump Sum Licenses - In Ecofactor, Inc. V. Google LLC, Appeal No. 23-1101, The Federal Circuit held that license agreements containing a lump sum payment “based on” a royalty...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to deny a defendant’s motion for a new trial on damages, finding that the plaintiff’s damages expert sufficiently showed that prior license...more
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2023-1101 (Fed. Cir. June 3, 2024) In the Federal Circuit’s only precedential patent opinion this week, the court addressed issues of infringement and admissibility that arose...more
Summary: License agreements containing a lump-sum payment “based on” a royalty rate may provide reliable evidence of a reasonable royalty rate for the licensed patent. EcoFactor sued Google for patent infringement over...more
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
In patent litigation, the adequacy of proof of apportionment in reasonable royalty damage claims is often a challenging issue that is hotly contested by the parties. The Federal Circuit has recently focused on the use of...more
Considering numerous claim construction, infringement and damages issues related to patents allegedly covering Apple’s iPhones 5 and 6 series technology, a panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit determined...more
ROHM SEMICONDUCTOR USA, LLC v. MAXPOWER SEMICONDUCTOR, INC. Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Chen. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: An arbitration agreement, which...more
APPLE, INC. v. QUALCOMM, INC. Before Newman, Prost, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Apple lacked standing to appeal an IPR decision upholding patents that Apple licenses from...more
A federal district court, applying Florida law, has held that an insurer owed no duty to defend or indemnify its insured because the acts giving rise to the underlying litigation were related to earlier litigation that...more
On August 26, in MCL Intellectual Property, LLC v. Micron Technology, Inc., the Federal Circuit affirmed exclusion of an expert opinion regarding a reasonable royalty, holding that the district court did not abuse its...more
MLC INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, LLC v. MICRON TECHNOLOGY, INC. Before Newman, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: When relying upon lump sum...more
In a precedential decision, the Federal Circuit held that Apple lacked standing to appeal from its loss as petitioner in a couple of inter partes reviews (IPRs) against patent owner Qualcomm. Background - Qualcomm sued...more
In interpreting a patent license agreement originally drafted in the era of third generation (3G) cellular networks, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the license agreement covered subsequent wireless...more
Despite no precedential patent decisions at the Federal Circuit, the Court still addressed some interesting issues last week, including whether a license agreement from 1993 bars patent infringement claims on LTE technology...more