DE Under 3: Reversal of 2019 Enterprise Rent-a-Car Trial Decision; EEOC Commissioner Nominee Update; Overtime Listening Session
The Dangers of Untimely Filings – What Employers Need to Know
Podcast: Non-binding Guidance: A Discussion of Kisor v. Wilkie
Jones Day Talks: Women in IP: The Supreme Court's "Copyright Day"
E17: Carpenter Decision Builds Up Privacy from #SCOTUS
In 2023, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued three opinions regarding U.S. design patents. The three 2023 opinions are Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., LKQ...more
Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc., Appeal Nos. 2021-2299, -2338 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 15, 2023) - In a decade-old case that has raised a number of issues relating to design patents...more
This year, we will mark the 10-year anniversary of the first jury verdict in the landmark IP litigation between Apple and Samsung, which resulted in the jury awarding more than $1B to Apple. More than $500M of that award was...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Campbell Soup petitioned for inter partes review (IPR) of Gamon’s design patents D612,646 and D621,645. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) instituted the IPR and determined that Campbell Soup did not establish...more
In a procedurally complicated case involving allegations of both utility and design patent infringement, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a district court’s piecemeal approach to a design patent...more
On November 13, 2019 the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Columbia Sportswear North America, Inc. v. Seirus Innovative Accessories, Inc. (2018-1329, -1331, -1728). The case involved appeals from both Columbia and Seirus...more
COLUMBIA SPORTSWEAR v. SEIRUS INNOVATIVE ACCESSORIES - Before Lourie, Moore, and Stoll. Appeal from the U.S. District Court for Southern District of California. Summary: An accused infringer’s use of ornamental logos...more
Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC (No. 2017-1521, 8/27/18) (Reyna, Taranto, Chen) Reyna, J. - Vacating and remanding the PTAB’s IPR decision because the PTAB erred in not considering portions of the petitioner’s...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - JTEKT Corporation v. GKN Automotive Ltd., Appeal No. 2017-1828 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 3, 2018) The Federal Circuit dismissed an appeal from an inter partes review, holding that, although JTEKT...more
Federal Circuit Summary - Before Newman, Clevenger and Chen. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: Prosecution history estoppel does not bar enforcement of a...more
U.S. patent laws allow for the disgorgement of the "total profits" earned by a design patent infringer deemed to have applied the "patented design" to "any article of manufacture." The disgorged profits historically were...more
Just when it seemed that we might have finally reached the end of the epic battle between Apple and Samsung in what was once called the “patent trial of the century,” the District Court for the Northern District of California...more
In 2011, Apple sued Samsung in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.) alleging that several Samsung smartphones infringed utility and design patents owned...more
Addressing the design patent battle between Apple and Samsung on remand from the Supreme Court of the United States, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit declined to apply the new standard or to order specific...more
#10 Design Patent Damages § 289 - Samsung Elecs. Co., v. Apple Inc., 580 U.S. _ (Dec. 6, 2016) - In the case of a multicomponent product, the relevant article of manufacture for arriving at a damages award under...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 U.S. Supreme Court in a unanimous 8-0 opinion reversed and remanded to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an award to Apple, Inc. of $399 million of Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.'s total profits on...more
The Supreme Court of the United States handed Samsung a victory yesterday by reversing a $400 million judgment previously won by Apple for infringement of several of Apple's design patents. In a unanimous 8-0 decision, the...more
A unanimous Supreme Court held in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc. that Section 289 of the Patent Act does not demand that the entire, infringing end-user product be the basis for determining damages for design patent...more
In a case reversing a $399 million damages award to Apple, the U.S. Supreme Court has held unanimously that an “article of manufacture” under the design patent damages statute can be anything from an entire product to a...more
On December 6, 2016, the United States Supreme Court handed down an important unanimous decision regarding damages in design patent cases, throwing out a $400 million damages award that Apple had won from Samsung over...more
Since their initial release, smartphones have been a hot commodity with intense competition. One particularly contentious issue has been their appearance. During early development, Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) obtained several...more
On December 6, 2016, in a unanimous opinion written by Justice Sotomayor, the Supreme Court reversed the Federal Circuit’s affirmance of the damages award in Samsung Electronics Co. v. Apple Inc. The question before the...more
A Unanimous U.S. Supreme Court Pulls Back the Reach of Damages Awards for Design Patents Summary The U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday, December 6, 2016, unanimously held that damages awards for design patent infringement need...more