News & Analysis as of

Attorney's Fees Supreme Court of the United States Patents

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2024 #4

LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, Appeal No. 2021-2348 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2024) - In a rare en banc opinion, the Federal Circuit overruled decades of prior precedent concerning the standard to...more

Axinn, Veltrop & Harkrider LLP

ChromaDex Stands Out, But Not in a Good Way

The law of patent eligibility was pretty quiet for decades until the Supreme Court breathed new life into Section 101 invalidity challenges in a series of decisions starting in 2010 with Bilski v. Kappos. In its current...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Orders of Interest Roundup

At Federal Circuitry blog, we like to check in once in a while on what the Federal Circuit is doing in its orders that don’t get posted on the public website. Those orders often offer nuggets about practice at the Federal...more

Miller Canfield

IP Litigation Quarterly Update

Miller Canfield on

In the second quarter of 2020, the Supreme Court decided five intellectual property focused cases in which it resolved a longstanding circuit split in Romag Fasteners and opened the door to the trademark registration of...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Supreme Court: Patent Office Cannot Be Reimbursed for Attorney and Paralegal Salaries

In Peters v. NantKwest, Inc., the Supreme Court, in a unanimous decision written by Justice Sonia Sotomayor, held that the “all expenses of the proceedings” provision of a 35 U.S.C. § 145 civil appeal does not include the...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Top Stories of 2019: #6 to #10

After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 13th annual list of top patent stories.  For 2019, we identified fifteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Supreme Court Rejects USPTO Attorney Fee Policy

On December 11, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court struck down the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) controversial policy of shifting attorneys’ fees in Peter v. NantKwest, Case No. 18-801. The Court ruled that the USPTO...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - December 2019 #2

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Peter v. Nantkwest, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-801 (Sup. Ct. Dec. 11, 2019) - This week the Supreme Court answered a long-simmering question concerning the extent to which a person who brings a...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Refuses to Require Applicants to Pay USPTO’s Attorney Fees in District Court “Appeals” of Prosecution Decisions

A patent applicant dissatisfied with a decision by the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) has two options for review of that decision. Most commonly—by far—the applicant can appeal the decision to the U.S. Court...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

The Restoration of (Bad) Faith: The Proper Standard for a Factual Finding of Willful Infringement

Enhanced Damages Under the Patent Act - The Patent Act provides that once infringement has been established, a district court may “increase the damages up to three times the amount found or assessed.” 35 U.S.C. § 284. The...more

Dorsey & Whitney LLP

Attorneys May Be Expensive, But Are Their Fees “Expenses”?

Dorsey & Whitney LLP on

On March 4, 2019, the Supreme Court agreed to hear Iancu v. NantKwest, Inc., which will determine whether unsuccessful applicants before the United States Patent and Trademark Office who elect to challenge adverse decisions...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Spineology, Inc. v. Wright Medical Technology, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2018)

The Supreme Court changed the calculus on what conduct satisfies the "exceptional case" criteria for awarding attorney's fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 in its Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness Inc. and Highmark Inc. v....more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

2017 Supreme Court and Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit, With Some Significant Cases from 2016

Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Octane Fitness Hits the Showers: Federal Circuit Affirms Attorneys’ Fees Award in Landmark Case

After an eight-year battle through the Federal Courts, the fight over attorneys’ fees in Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness has likely reached its end with the Federal Circuit upholding the hotly disputed $1.6 million...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Consideration Under Octane Fitness Requires Fresh Case Analysis

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court decision for proper application of the exceptional case standard set forth in Octane Fitness v. Icon Health & Fitness (IP Update, Vol. 18,...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - July 2017

Knobbe Martens on

District Court Abused Discretion in Not Finding Case Exceptional - In Rothschild Connected Devices v. Guardian Protection Services, Appeal No. 2016-2521, the Federal Circuit held that a district court abused its discretion...more

A&O Shearman

Intellectual Property Newsletter - June 2017

A&O Shearman on

Shearman & Sterling’s IP litigation team has published its quarterly newsletter. The newsletter covers a wide range of current IP topics: the Supreme Court’s TC Heartland patent-venue decision, the constitutionality of inter...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Summaries of All Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases Decided Since Jun. 1, 2016

This paper is based on reports on precedential patent cases decided by the Federal Circuit distributed by Peter Heuser on a weekly basis. ...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Supreme Court and Precedential Federal Circuit Patent Cases

In SCA v. First Quality Baby Products, the Supreme Court holds that laches should not be available as a defense in patent cases, refusing to concur with the Circuit’s en banc holding that the Patent Act’s 6-year limitation on...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

MoFo IP Newsletter - August 2016

Supreme Court Abolished Federal Circuit's Test for Willfulness - On June 13, 2016, in Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 579 U.S. ___ (2016), the Supreme Court unanimously abrogated the Federal Circuit’s...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | July 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Obvious Combinations Do Not Need to Be Physically Combinable - In Allied Erecting and Dismantling Co., Inc. v. Genesis Attachments, LLC, Appeal No. 2015-1533, the Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB’s invalidity finding...more

McNees Wallace & Nurick LLC

Supreme Court Injects Uncertainty Into Attorney’s Fee Awards in Copyright Cases

The day after it liberalized the standard for awarding enhanced damages in patent cases, a unanimous Supreme Court, in an opinion authored by Justice Kagan, substantially broadened lower courts’ discretion in granting...more

Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C.

High Court Eases Ability to Recover Enhanced Remedies in Patent and Copyright Cases

Within the past week, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down two unanimous rulings that could make it easier for prevailing parties in patent cases to recover enhanced damages and for winning parties in copyright cases to recover...more

Kelley Drye & Warren LLP

Supreme Court ruling increases patent owners’ ability to get enhanced damages (Halo v. Pulse)

On June 13, 2016, the Supreme Court issued an opinion that replaces the Federal Circuit’s strict Seagate test for enhanced patent damages with a test that is easier for patent owners to meet. Relying extensively on the...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - June 2016

Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016: An Overview - Why it matters: The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) was signed into law on May 11, 2016 and gives trade secret owners a federal cause of action for injunctive...more

74 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide