On May 20, the Federal Circuit held fees incurred in voluntary parallel IPR proceedings were not recoverable under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Dragon Intell. Prop. LLC v. DISH Network L.L.C., No. 2022-1621, slip op. at 8 (Fed. Cir. May...more
This Patent Law case involves a patent infringement lawsuit brought by Fa-Hsing Lu against Hyper Bicycles, Inc. regarding two design patents Lu holds for the ornamental design of a bicycle. In a prior ruling, the court...more
This case addresses the proper standard for an appeal of a discretionary decision by a successor judge as well as requests for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 and certain circumstances that do not make a case...more
Sometimes just because the rules permit something doesn’t mean doing it is a good idea. As our latest case-of-the-week shows, the result could be an award of attorney fees. Case of the week: Realtime Adaptive Streaming...more
This post summarizes two recent Eastern District of Texas opinions regarding the award of attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Traxcell Technologies, LLC v. AT&T, Inc. et al, 2-17-cv-00718 (EDTX Mar. 29, 2022) (Roy S....more
In 2021, district courts were faced with resolving numerous requests by parties seeking attorney fees based on conduct in related USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings. Many of these requests came in the wake...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Love it or hate it, ignore the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at your peril. The introduction of the PTAB as part of the America Invents Act over ten years ago has forever changed...more
After a couple of weeks with lots of precedential decisions, the Federal Circuit caught its breath last week and issued only non-precedential ones (with the possible exception of a sealed opinion that may or may not be...more
Recently in Nike, Inc. v. Skechers U.S.A., Inc., 2:17-cv-08509 (C.D. Cal.) (October 26, 2020), the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California granted-in-part and denied-in-part Defendant, Skechers U.S.A.,...more
In an April 13, 2020, decision, the Federal Circuit held that neither a voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i), nor a stay of a patent lawsuit pending the results of a patent reexamination,...more