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
Honeywell International Inc. has taken a proactive stance against what it describes as "unwarranted and unfounded" patent litigation by filing a declaratory judgment action in the Western District of North Carolina against...more
Needless to say, a finding of exceptionality under 35 U.S.C. § 285 can have crippling consequences. Just ask Rembrandt Technologies, LP, which recently was slapped with an order to pay the prevailing defendants in a...more
Are patent trolls hurting your business’ bottom line? Whether you are a large publicly traded company or a small privately owned business, you’re not alone. Patent trolls are targeting businesses across the spectrum,...more
On October 19, 2015, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in two related cases: Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc. (Supreme Court docket number 14-1513) and Stryker Corp. v. Zimmer, Inc. (Supreme Court docket...more
The heady days of 2012 saw “Gangnam Style” dominate the U.S. music charts, Patricia Krentcil rocket to fame as the “New Jersey Tanning Mom,” and the New York Giants win the Super Bowl. That year also is the source of nearly...more
Congress v SCtPatent litigation reform has been on the U.S. House Judiciary Committee agenda, with the recent reintroduction of legislation seeking to address patent litigation abuses and a hearing examining recent U.S....more
A recent case in the District of Connecticut demonstrates that courts may be more willing to award attorneys’ fees to a small plaintiff, encouraging such a plaintiff to protect its patent when it is the plaintiff’s “primary...more
Oregon introduces bill to make improper patent license demands a violation of its unlawful trade practices law - In February 2014, Senate Bill 1540 was filed, which would make patent trolling a violation of the...more
In April, the Supreme Court reshaped the patent litigation landscape with its Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness and Highmark, Inc v. Allcare Health Management System, Inc., rulings. The statute at issue in both...more
Last Wednesday, May 21, the Senate Judiciary Committee removed a bill from their agenda that sought to protect companies against “patent trolls,” which are companies whose main business is to gather patents, threaten...more
Two decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court on April 29, 2014 may have an impact on the “patent trolls” debate by changing the rules relating to the award of attorney fees to a winning party in litigation relating to patent...more
In 2013, the Supreme Court decided three patent cases. By June of 2014, it is expected that there will have been six more decisions in patent cases. This week alone, there have been oral arguments heard or decisions released...more
The Supreme Court issued decisions in two cases yesterday that will make it easier for defendants to seek sanctions against non-practicing entities or any other entity for abusive patent litigation. In Highmark Inc. v....more
On April 29, 2014, the Supreme Court delivered much-anticipated decisions in the Octane and Highmark cases and redefined the framework for determining whether a patent lawsuit is “exceptional,” justifying an award of...more
In two unanimous decisions handed down yesterday, the United States Supreme Court has offered some encouragement to defendants who choose to litigate against so-called patent trolls that the cost of doing so may be...more
On April 29, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions that could curtail abusive patent practices implemented by "patent trolls" or non-practicing entities (NPE) by relaxing the legal standards for awarding...more
On April 29, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court announced its highly anticipated decisions in a pair of cases governing the award of attorney fees in patent infringement lawsuits. In the two cases, the Court tossed out the Federal...more