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 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
For anyone following the evolving admissibility standards for expert opinions relating to patent damages, the EcoFactor v. Google case is one to watch. In December 2024, the Federal Circuit granted Google’s petition for...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
In 2010, Trading Technologies International, Inc. (“TT”) filed suit against IBG LLC and its subsidiary Interactive Brokers LLC for patent infringement. The four patents in question, U.S. Patent Nos. 6,766,304; 6,772,132;...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to preclude a patent owner from seeking damages based on method claims infringed outside of the United States but confirmed that reasonable...more
8 Puma Biotechnology is the latest victim of standing requirements in patent cases that continue to wreak havoc on plaintiffs’ ability to recover a full measure of damages. In Puma Biotechnology, Inc. v. AstraZeneca...more
Earlier this month, I previewed a Federal Circuit oral argument in In re: California Expanded Metal Products Co., No. 2023-1140, where the district court vacated a jury award of a 12 percent royalty and denied a motion for an...more
It was a tough day for opposing patent damages experts in Ecolab Inc. v. Dubois Chemicals, Inc., as Judge Andrews of the District of Delaware granted Daubert motions directed to both experts' reasonable royalty opinions. The...more
Four subjects stood out in patent litigation in Texas in April 2023: (1) applicability of the customer-suit exception to the first-to-file rule; (2) the level of ties a reasonable royalty methodology must have to the facts of...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
By Dan Staren and David Barker Last week, a Federal Circuit panel vacated a billion dollar jury verdict in favor of plaintiff-appellee California Institute of Technology (“Caltech”) and remanded for a new trial on damages...more
California Institute of Technology v. Broadcom Inc. and Apple Inc. Before Lourie, Linn, and Dyk (concurring/dissenting). Appeal from the District Court for the Central District of California - Summary: IPR estoppel in...more
The lithium-ion battery, introduced commercially in 1991, revolutionized the consumer electronics industry. Compared with older battery technologies, the lithium-ion battery was lightweight and compact, had high energy...more
Technology companies frequently enter into patent licensing transactions, sometimes in order to settle patent litigation, and sometimes as a simple licensing or cross-licensing deal. But the parties to such agreements...more
MODERNATX, INC. v. ARBUTUS BIOPHARMA CORPORATION - Before Lourie, O’Malley, and Stoll. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Sublicensee’s theory of royalty-based injury was too speculative to...more
This post summarizes some of the significant developments related to patent litigation in federal district courts of Texas for the month of October 2021....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
Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - *WilmerHale represented the Appellee. COMMSCOPE TECHNOLOGIES LLC v. DALI WIRELESS INC. [OPINION] (2020-1817, 2020-1818, 08/24/2021) (REYNA, SCHALL, and STOLL) - Stoll, J....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
Just two weeks into the name, image, and likeness (NIL) era in college sports, and we are already starting to see not only novel and creative partnerships, but also the emergence of legal gray areas and pitfalls for college...more
In a recent decision issued in Bayer Healthcare LLC v. Baxalta Inc., the Federal Circuit held that the district court did not abuse its discretion when it allowed the jury to select from a range of proposed royalty rates...more
A patent holder that prevails in a patent infringement suit is entitled to either lost profits or a reasonable royalty. A reasonable royalty calculation often implicates the infringing product's revenues (the "royalty...more
A recent decision in the Eastern District of Texas should provide standard-essential patent (“SEP”) owners with more clarity and optimism when negotiating SEP licenses. Coming on the heels of Judge Koh’s decision in the FTC’s...more
Recently, in Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1 v. TCL Commc’n Tech. Holdings Ltd., the Delaware District Court awarded the prevailing plaintiff in a patent infringement suit an ongoing royalty that covers not only the products...more
PanOptis Patent Management, LLC (“PanOptis”) was recently awarded enhanced damages and ongoing royalties as a result of Huawei Technology Co. Ltd. (“Huawei”) infringing five of its patents, four of which were alleged to be...more