Category Archives: Patent Litigation

On March 21, 2017 the Supreme Court issued an opinion that abrogated the equitable defense of laches, for unreasonable and prejudicial delay in filing suit, in patent cases. SCA Hygiene Prod. Aktiebolag v. First Quality Baby Prod., LLC, No. 15-927, … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Comments Off on Supreme Court Kills Laches Defense for Patent Infringement

On February 22, 2017, the Supreme Court in Life Technologies v. Promega ruled that “a single component does not constitute a substantial portion of the components that can give rise to liability under §271(f)(1).”[1]  This ruling limits the reach of … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Life Technologies v. Promega: Supreme Court Limits Infringement Liability under Section 271(f)(1)

This is the next part of our series of posts on utilizing California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1030, in patent cases, particularly as a strategy against nuisance suits. Section 1030 provides that a defendant may move the court to … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Strategies Against Nuisance Patent Suits Part II – Cases on California Civil Procedure Code 1030

Much is lamented about the burden and costs that nuisance patent litigation imposes. Recently, with the Supreme Court agreeing to hear a case on restricting patent litigation venue, the problems of forum shopping by NPEs have come back into the … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged , , | Comments Off on Strategies Against Nuisance Patent Suits – Utilizing California Civil Procedure Code 1030

As the Supreme Court kicked off October Term 2016, it continues to show a strong interest in patent law, granting three petitions so far with more petitions to be considered. Samsung v. Apple – Design Patents Damages The first is … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Supreme Court October Term 2016 Preview – Patent Cases

On March 9, 2016, in Charge Injection Technologies, Inc. v. E.I. Dupont De Nemours & Company, C.A. No. 07C-12-134-JRL, the Superior Court of the State of Delaware issued a decision on a motion to dismiss for violating state champerty and … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Litigation Financing Is Not Champerty: Delaware Confirms That Litigation Financing Is Here To Stay

On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court issued its decision in Cuozzo Speed Technologies, LLC v. Lee.  One of the questions presented to the Court was the appropriate claim construction standard for inter partes review (IPR).  The fundamental dispute, as … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Cuozzo Conundrum: Prosecution History Estoppel Remains An Open Issue

Through its recent decision in Halo Elecs., Inc. v. Pulse Elecs., Inc.[1], the Supreme Court discarded the mechanical two-part test governing enhanced damages fashioned by the Federal Circuit in Seagate, and gave district courts broad discretion to decide when to … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Supreme Court Relaxes The Standard For Increased Patent Damages

Glaser Weil is pleased to announce that Partner and Head of the Trademark, Copyright and Media Practice Erica Van Loon has been named to Law360’s “Rising Stars” list, which recognizes top legal talent under the age of 40 with outstanding … Continue reading

Posted in Copyright & Idea Theft, Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Trade Secret & Unfair Competition, Trademark & Trade Dress | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Glaser Weil Partner and Head of the Trademark, Copyright and Media Practice Erica Van Loon Named to Law360’s “Rising Stars” List

As most practitioners know, even a duly issued patent can be invalidated under 35 U.S.C. § 101 if the patent’s claims are directed to a “patent-ineligible concept,” such as an abstract idea.  Yet, trying to anticipate whether a patent claim … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, PTAB | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 35 U.S.C. § 101 – If At First You Don’t Succeed, Try, Try Again