On June 29, 2021, the Supreme Court limited the doctrine of assignor estoppel that has long prevented inventors from challenging the validity of patents they have assigned to a third party. ...more
In a closely-watched case, the Supreme Court on Monday ruled 6-2 that Google’s copying of over 11,000 lines of Oracle’s application programming interface (API) code was permissible fair use under copyright law. Writing for...more
4/8/2021
/ Copyright ,
Copyright Infringement ,
Copyright Litigation ,
Fair Use ,
Google ,
Google LLC v Oracle America Inc ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Java ,
Oracle ,
SCOTUS ,
Transformative Use
U.S. patents incentivize innovation by allowing patent owners to prevent others from making, using, offering for sale, selling, or importing their inventions into the United States for a period of 20 years. Patent owners are...more
5/31/2017
/ Chattel ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Foreign Sales ,
Impression Products v Lexmark International ,
IP License ,
Patent Exhaustion ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
SCOTUS ,
Single-Use/No Resale Restriction ,
Stream of Commerce
For nearly three decades, patent owners have been able to file patent infringement lawsuits in any court that had personal jurisdiction over the accused infringer. This broad approach to venue led to the rise of remote...more
5/23/2017
/ Food Manufacturers ,
Forum Shopping ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Multidistrict Litigation ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Personal Jurisdiction ,
Principal Place of Business ,
SCOTUS ,
TC Heartland LLC v Kraft Foods ,
Venue
Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. v. Apple Inc. (No. 15-777) -
In the closely-watched Samsung v. Apple case, the Supreme Court today issued a landmark ruling that changed the long-standing rule for calculating damages for...more
12/7/2016
/ Apple ,
Apple v Samsung ,
Cell Phones ,
Corporate Counsel ,
Design Patent ,
iPhone ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Popular ,
Samsung ,
SCOTUS ,
Section 101 ,
Smartphones
After several years of handing down perceived anti-patent rulings, yesterday in Halo Elecs. v. Pulse Elecs., the Supreme Court gave patent owners an extra weapon against infringers by making it easier to recover enhanced...more
On May 26, 2015, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (No. 13-896), rejecting the accused patent infringer’s argument that a good faith belief that the patent is invalid is a defense...more
On March 31, 2015, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (No. 13-896), which relates to whether a defendant can be liable for inducing infringement if the defendant had a good faith...more
In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court revised the standard of review used by the Federal Circuit for nearly twenty years in reviewing claim construction rulings, replacing a de novo standard...more
In Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc., the Supreme Court revised the standard of review used by the Federal Circuit for nearly twenty years in reviewing claim construction rulings, replacing a de novo standard...more