News & Analysis as of

Exceptional Case Claim Construction Attorney's Fees

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

The Federal Circuit Interprets the Application of 35 USC § 285 and Attorney’s Fees

In Dragon Intellectual Property LLC v. Dish Network L.L.C. No. 22-1621 (Fed. Cir. May 20, 2024), the Federal Circuit clarifies the standard for “exceptional” cases under 35 U.S.C. § 285. The case concerns attorneys’ fees and...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - November 2023

In re PersonalWeb Technologies LLC, Appeals Nos. 2021-1858, -1859, -1860 (Fed. Cir. Nov. 3, 2023) In this appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, the question before the...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

OneSubsea IP UK Ltd. v. FMC Tech., Inc., No. 22-1099 (Fed. Cir. May 23, 2023)

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

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

2021 PTAB Year in Review: Analysis & Trends

[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

Haug Partners LLP

Federal Circuit Clarifies the Willful Infringement Standard and Provides Insights on Conduct That is Exceptional in SRI v. Cisco

Haug Partners LLP on

The Federal Circuit in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 20-1685, slip op. (Fed. Cir. Sep. 28, 2021) addressed the standards for willful infringement and enhanced damages, and provided insights on litigation tactics...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - October 2021

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions KANNUU PTY LTD. v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. [OPINION] (2021-1638, 10/7/21) (Newman, Prost, Chen) - Chen, J. Denying motion for preliminary injunction. Patentee sought to compel...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Where Both Parties Behave Badly in Litigation, Attorneys’ Fees Are Unlikely to Be Awarded

On April 25, 2019, in Int’l Designs Corp., LLC, et. al. v. Hair Art Int’l, Inc., Judge George H. Wu in the Central District of California denied Hair Art’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Judge Wu concluded...more

Proskauer - New England IP Blog

“Blatant and Unapologetic” Judge Shopping Warrants “Exceptional Case” Determination

In a dramatic conclusion to the nearly seven year old patent litigation between Datatern and Microstrategy (including a number of Microstrategy’s customers), Judge Saylor in the District of Massachusetts recently awarded...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Precedential Patent Cases From the Federal Circuit

In AdjustaCam v. Newegg, the Circuit reverses the denial of attorney fees where Judge Gilstrap simply adopted a pre-Octane Fitness determination by a prior judge, despite the Circuit’s post-Octane Fitness remand of the case...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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | October 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Withdrawal of Claims During Prosecution Can Trigger Prosecution History Estoppel In UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2015-1957, the Federal Circuit held that prosecution estoppel can apply even...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

IP Newsflash - February 2016

FEDERAL CIRCUIT CASES - Federal Circuit Strikes Down Award of Attorneys’ Fees - In a decision that rejects a recent trend of district courts’ willingness to award attorneys’ fees since the Supreme Court’s 2014...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Ambiguity in Court’s Construction Creates Objective Reasonableness of Infringement and Negates Exceptional Case Determination -...

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the award of attorneys’ fees by the district court, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed the district court’s grant of fees under § 285 and affirmed the district court’s denial of fees under §...more

13 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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