Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Wolf Greenfield’s New Shareholders
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Tonia Sayour in the Spotlight
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
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
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
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
278-1. Federal Circuit Remands Patent Infringement Case to Answer Patent Ownership and License to Practice Questions - The Federal Circuit recently vacated a grant of summary judgment of non-infringement of a patent,...more
Whether your portfolio comprises one patent or hundreds of patents, it is important to utilize the portfolio to support continued production and innovation efforts; to explore alternative revenue streams through licensing of...more