PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Cease and Desist Letters: Protecting Your Intellectual Property the Right Way
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Art of Teaching Complex Technology in Patent Litigation - IMS Insights Podcast Episode 67
The Briefing: Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
Podcast: The Briefing - Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
5 Key Takeaways | How to Effectively Leverage the Chinese Patent System
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
Donation (Disclosure-Dedication) Doctrine in China’s Patent Litigation
6 Key Takeaways | Patent Opinions – New Developments and Pitfalls
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Kidon IP War Stories: David Cohen & Daryl Lim
Protecting the PB&J – Preserving IP Rights from Concept to Market
Patent Marking in China
On April 18, in Recentive Analytics, Inc., v. Fox Corp., which presented a question of first impression, the Federal Circuit held that claims that do no more than apply established methods of machine learning to a new data...more
Patent holders must start Unified Patent Court (UPC) proceedings on the merits within a certain period if they do not want to risk the revocation of provisional measures. The UPC has now clarified that filing the statement of...more
Because there are different burdens of proof in IPRs and district court, collateral estoppel does not preclude a patent owner from asserting claims that are immaterially different from claims canceled in an IPR....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court determination that a patent owner had not provided the “particularized testimony and linking argument” required to demonstrate equivalence under the...more
EcoFactor, Inc. v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2023-1101 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 25, 2024) The Federal Circuit’s only precedential opinion this week was a rare order that granted en banc review of a prior panel decision. Here, the...more
In In re Cellect, 81 F.4th 1216 (Fed. Cir. 2023), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a later-expiring patent can be invalid for obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) in view of an earlier-expiring,...more
Amazon’s Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) program provides an expedited and low-cost tool for patent owners to stop the sale of infringing products on Amazon’s platform. But low cost does not mean low risk. The U.S. Court of...more
SnapRays v. Lighting Defense Group, Appeal No. 2023-1184 (Fed. Cir. May 2, 2024) Our Case of the Week deals with an issue the Court has not addressed recently: the question of declaratory judgment jurisdiction....more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s indefiniteness determination, finding that two claim limitations – one broad and one narrow – were not contradictory since it was possible to meet...more
The PTAB recently declined to apply Section 325(d) and instituted inter partes review after a patent owner unsuccessfully argued that the petition relied on substantially the same prior art as that which the Office had...more
The Federal Circuit recently held, for the first time, that patent owners bear the burden of proof for an Inter Partes Review (“IPR”) Estoppel affirmative defense that an alleged infringer failed to include prior art in a...more
Patent owners worry about what they can and cannot publicly say about infringement of their patent rights. Accused infringers may believe that certain public statements by patent owners are actionable on the basis that such...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s preliminary injunction prohibiting a patent owner from communicating its view that a competitor infringed, finding that the speech restriction was...more
Addressing the public use bar of pre-America-Invents-Act (AIA) 35 U.S.C. § 102(b), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to invalidate a patent because the patent owner’s...more
On remand from a decision allowing the US District Court for the District of Delaware to continue its probe into who was funding a patent owner’s infringement litigation, the district court denied the patent owner’s motion to...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied a patent owner’s mandamus petition, clearing the way for a district court to probe who is funding the patent owner’s infringement litigation. In re Nimitz Techs. LLC,...more
On September 7, in Arendi S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics Inc., a Federal Circuit panel affirmed the District of Delaware’s decision dismissing a patent infringement action as duplicative of a co-pending, earlier-filed action. ...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld an attorneys’ fees award after the patent owner brought successive patent infringement suits attempting “to refile to wipe the slate clean” after the first court was...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a damages verdict because the acts supporting the induced infringement finding took place years before the statutory damages period and thus could not support a finding...more
Littelfuse, Inc. v. Mersen USA EP Corp., Appeal No. 2021-2013 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 4, 2022) - Our Case of the Week focuses on the issue of claim construction, and, more specifically, the doctrine of claim differentiation....more
On March 16, 2022, U.S. District Judge William Alsup of the Northern District of California certified two of the hot button issues splitting district courts on the standard for pleading willful infringement (see order),...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded that the minimum contacts or purposeful availment test for specific personal jurisdiction was satisfied where a patent owner sent multiple infringement notice letters...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, exploring the use of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(3) under Ninth Circuit law, affirmed a district court’s ruling setting aside a monetary damages judgment and an...more
Addressing the standard for mootness in inter partes review (IPR) proceedings following a district court noninfringement judgment, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a petitioner’s IPR appeal was moot...more
In the only precedential patent opinion issued this week, the Federal Circuit determined multiple issues in cross-appeals from the district court’s disposition of post-trial motions following a jury trial. The dispute...more