3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
(Podcast) The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Briefing: Netflix to Pay $2.5M to GoTV for Patent Infringement
The Art of Teaching Complex Technology in Patent Litigation - IMS Insights Podcast Episode 67
The Briefing: Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
Podcast: The Briefing - Failure to Disclose Relationship with Real Party in Interest Results in Serious Sanctions
5 Key Takeaways | How to Effectively Leverage the Chinese Patent System
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
Donation (Disclosure-Dedication) Doctrine in China’s Patent Litigation
6 Key Takeaways | Patent Opinions – New Developments and Pitfalls
Patent Right Evaluation Report in China’s Patent System
Kidon IP War Stories: David Cohen & Daryl Lim
Protecting the PB&J – Preserving IP Rights from Concept to Market
Patent Marking in China
Webinar: Orange Book listing sheets under the microscope
Kidon IP War Stories – David Cohen & Dragos Vilau
Stages of Patent Invalidation Proceedings
What's New on China's Punitive Damages in IP Litigation?
Willful Patent Infringement: Understanding and Preparing for Claims
In a split opinion issued Tuesday, and based on language in an assignment clause of a contract, the Federal Circuit overturned a district court's summary judgment that Core Optical lacked standing to sue Nokia, Cisco, and...more
SRI INTERNATIONAL, INC. v. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Before LOURIE, O’MALLEY, and STOLL. Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Applying the proper test for willful...more
After a bench trial, the Eastern District of Virginia found Cisco to have willfully infringed patents owned by Centripetal Networks Inc., a small operating company, and awarded a judgment of $1.9 billion dollars. Cisco,...more
The Supreme Court in Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc., 136 S. Ct. 1923, 1932, 195 L. Ed. 2d 278 (2016), relaxed the standard for a finding of willful patent infringement under 35 USC Section 284. The “objective...more
Supreme Court Upholds Constitutionality of IPRs, Requires PTAB to Decide Validity of All Challenged Claims - Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group & SAS Institute v. Iancu (24 April 2018)....more
In a new twist in competitor-based lawsuits involving cloud computing, Centripetal Networks, a relative newcomer, filed a patent lawsuit against industry incumbent and Fortune 100 Company Cisco in the U.S. District Court for...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued Final Written Decisions regarding Cisco’s U.S. Patent Nos. 6,377,577 (the “’577 Patent”) and 7,023,853 (the “’853 Patent”) on May 25, 2017 and U.S. Patent No. 7,224,668 (the...more
December has been a hot month for IP law, with important developments in several cases that may significantly impact your intellectual property prosecution and enforcement strategies. Here is a brief summary of each of these...more
The patent case between Commil and Cisco, a case that made new law at the Supreme Court on the issue of the intent requirement in cases of induced infringement allegations, came to an end with a whimper on remand back to the...more
Protecting Trade Secrets in the Era of the Data Breach - The prevalence of data breaches cannot be ignored. New data breaches continue to occur one after an-other. In the first half of 2015 alone there were reports of...more
In its most recent pronouncement on patent law, the U.S. Supreme Court once again corrected the Federal Circuit’s understanding of induced infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(b). On May 26, 2015, in Commil USA, LLC v....more
In a sharply divided opinion, the Supreme Court has determined that a party may be liable for inducing the infringement of a patent even if it has a good faith belief that the patent is invalid. The decision, Commil USA, LLC...more
Six justices of the Supreme Court agree that an accused indirect infringer’s good faith belief in invalidity of a patent “will not negate the scienter required under §271(b).” Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 13-896,...more
On May 26, 2015, the Supreme Court ruled in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Sys., Inc. that an alleged infringer's belief regarding patent validity cannot be used as evidence in a defense to an induced infringement claim. In so...more
In a 6-2 decision this week, the United States Supreme Court in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc., 575 U.S. ____ (2015) held that an accused infringer’s good-faith belief of patent invalidity is not a defense to a claim...more
The Decision in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. - On Tuesday, the United States Supreme Court ruled that a party’s good-faith belief in the invalidity of a patent is not a defense to a claim that the party has...more
The Supreme Court issued its long-anticipated decision in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. on Tuesday holding that a patent infringement defendant’s good faith belief that the patent in suit is invalid is not a defense...more
The U.S. Supreme Court (Justice Kennedy writing for the majority) has now eliminated a defense that has been available to parties accused of actively inducing patent infringement under 35 USC § 271(b). The Court held that a...more
In Commil USA LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. (No. 13-896), the Supreme Court held that an accused inducer's belief that an asserted patent is invalid is not a defense to induced patent infringement. The decision reverses a...more
On May 26, 2015, in Commil v. Cisco, the Supreme Court held by a 6-2 vote that an accused infringer's belief that a patent is invalid does not serve as a defense to charges of inducing infringement of the patent under §...more
On May 26, 2015, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s decision in Commil USA, LLC v. Cisco Systems, Inc. and held that a defendant’s belief regarding patent validity is not a defense to an induced infringement...more
While the Supreme Court’s section 101 decisions may garner the biggest headlines, the high court has also invested significant efforts in the area of induced infringement. Commil v. Cisco, decided on May 26, 2015, marks the...more
DISTRICT COURT CASES - Eastern District of Virginia Grants Summary Judgment of Noninfringement to Adobe - On May 7, 2015, Judge Brinkema of the United States district court for the Eastern District of Virginia...more
No Case or Controversy in DJ Against Patentee Who Sued Manufacturer’s Customers: Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Alberta Telecommunications Research Center - In a non-precedential opinion addressing declaratory judgment...more
It is well established law that liability for inducement requires the specific intent to induce another to infringe. It is also well established law that a defendant may rely on a good faith belief that the there is no...more