4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Propel: Standard Essential Patents and the self-driving industry
SEP Litigation and the Internet of Things
Podcast: IP(DC): 5G for the C-Suite: Patent Hold-Up or Hold-Out?
You May Be Exhausted Over Standard Essential Patents (And Not Even Know It)
Podcast: Conductive Discussions: Recent FRAND & Trade Secret Enforcement Trends Affecting the Semiconductor Industry
Standard-essential patent (SEP) licensing remains a critical issue in Europe, where political bodies and national courts at times diverge in the interpretation of fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) licensing...more
Connected technology products are a part of daily life. Connectivity standards – such as 5G and Wi-Fi – provide a common language that allows products from different manufacturers to communicate with each other. ...more
The Munich Higher Regional Court issued a decision concerning the fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) negotiation process and an implementer’s obligation to provide security if a license offer for standard...more
In November 2024, the Local Division (LD) Mannheim of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) issued the UPC’s first-ever substantive decision on standard essential patents (SEPs) and fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND)...more
After years of litigating against each other in several jurisdictions around the world, Ericsson and Lenovo announced last week that they had entered into a global cross-licensing agreement involving 4G and 5G wireless...more
Governed by 19 U.S.C. § 337, the U.S. International Trade Commission (“ITC”) is empowered to investigate unfair acts in the importation of articles into the United States. The ITC can be a powerful forum for owners of U.S....more
Given the recent unanimous decision by a UK appellate court that Ericsson’s injunction efforts based on standard-essential patents (“SEPs”) were, essentially by their very nature, “hold-up” and “coercion” that violated...more
The United Kingdom's Court of Appeal has issued an important decision on the principles governing the grant of interim licenses in standard essential patent ("SEP") disputes....more
Appellate courts issued a variety of notable intellectual property (IP) cases in 2024, including cases touching on Orange Book listings, extraterritoriality, willful infringement, design patent obviousness, and public...more
On January 8, 2025, Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Cameron Elliot issued a public version of the Initial Determination (ID) in Certain Video Capable Electronic Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1380 brought by Complainant Nokia. While...more
A big question when it comes to fair, reasonable and non-discriminatory (FRAND/RAND) defenses for standard essential patents (SEPs) is whether and when a court should issue an injunction. One jurisdiction that may provide an...more
In a landmark decision, the Unified Patent Court’s (UPC) Local Division Mannheim set standards for enforcing standard essential patents (SEPs) and for negotiating fair, reasonable, and nondiscriminatory (FRAND) licenses under...more
This is the fourth issue of WilmerHale’s FRAND Quarterly: Navigating the Global SEP Landscape, a bulletin that highlights developments about the licensing, litigation, and regulation of patents that are or are claimed to be...more
On November, 22, 2024, the Mannheim Local Division of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) delivered a landmark ruling in Panasonic v. Oppo, setting a significant precedent in the realm of Standard Essential Patents (SEPs) and...more
Imagine your company designs, manufactures, or sells products that implement commonplace technologies like Wi-Fi, 5G, or video streaming. Did you know you might need a license to incorporate these technologies into your...more
Ericsson v. Lenovo, Inc., 2024 WL 4558664 (Fed. Cir. 2024) - On October 24, 2024, the Federal Circuit in Ericsson v. Lenovo vacated a district court’s denial of Lenovo’s request for an antisuit injunction in a case...more
TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON v. LENOVO (UNITED STATES), INC. Before Lourie, Prost, and Reyna. Appeal from the Eastern District of North Carolina. Summary: The threshold requirement for anti-suit injunctions, that the...more
On 24 October 2024, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Lenovo (U.S.), Inc. concluding that the threshold “dispositive” requirement of the foreign-antisuit-injunction...more
Why has arbitration become a popular method for resolving IP disputes? Here, we outline when to take that option - When negotiating intellectual property contracts, parties may spend little time considering dispute...more
Failure to Obtain Advice of a Third Party Is Not Evidence of Willfulness - In Provisur Technologies, Inc., v. Weber, Inc., Appeal No. 23-1438, the Federal Circuit held that patentees cannot use an accused infringer’s failure...more
In our blog, Another Implementer Hold Out Door Closes: The Death of the Anti-Suit Injunction? earlier this year, we suggested that a popular implementer patent hold out tactic may be off the table based on an order issued by...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a district court’s decision to deny an antisuit injunction prohibiting a patent owner from enforcing injunctions that it obtained in Columbia and Brazil on standard...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - NEXSTEP, INC. v. COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC [OPINION] (2022-1815, 2022-2005, 2022-2113, 10/24/2024) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) - Chen, J. The Court affirmed the...more
On October 24, 2024, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion that may have implications for litigation involving standard essential patents (SEPs). Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson v. Lenovo (United States), Inc.,...more
Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, Ericsson AB, Ericsson, Inc. v. Lenovo (United States), Inc. et. al., Appeal No. 2024-1515 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 24, 2024) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit clarified that, for an...more