Tag Archives: patent act

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

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

On March 23, 2016, Glaser Weil Partner, Mieke Malmberg, along with co-presenter, Jason Angell of Freitas Angell & Weinberg, LLP, presented a one hour talk on changes in patent litigation to participants in a one day conference sponsored by the … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Glaser Weil Partner Mieke Malmberg Speaking at “Patent Disputes for Our Time: New Realities, New Approaches”, Presented by the State Bar of California

In last week’s 6-5 decision in SCA Hygiene Prod. v. First Quality Baby Prod., LLC, No. 2013-1564, 2015 WL 5474261 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 18, 2015), the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting en banc, reaffirmed that laches … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Laches As a Defense to Patent Damages Survives – For Now

We have previously addressed the Supreme Court’s decision in Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., 12-1184, Slip Op. at 7 (2014), which relaxed the standard for awarding attorney’s fees under Section 285 of the Patent Act (“§285”) … Continue reading

Posted in Intellectual Property, Patent Litigation, Trade Secret & Unfair Competition, Trademark & Trade Dress | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Low Octane Levels? Octane Fitness’ Impact in the Trademark and Trade Secret Realms

Co-owning any piece of property can lead to unwanted and unexpected headaches.  And as demonstrated by the Federal Circuit in STC.UNM v. Intel Corp., Fed. Cir. No. 2013-1241, this is especially true with respect to co-ownership of patents. Here, the … Continue reading

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Federal Circuit Decision Highlights Risk of Co-owning Patents