Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In its recent opinion, Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 2:07-cv-00331 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 22, 2014), the Federal Circuit addressed what activity constitutes a sale or an offer for sale for purposes of 35 U.S.C. '271 and, in an important concurrence, Circuit Judge O'Malley provides a provocative analysis of the standard for enhanced damages under '284 in parallel to recent Supreme Court edicts on the standard for attorneys' fees under '285 and calls upon the Federal Circuit to reevaluate the standard for willfulness.
In Nov. 2012, a federal jury in Nevada awarded Halo $1.5 million for infringement of three of Halo's patents, each entitled 'Electronic Surface Mount Package.' Halo claimed Pulse infringed by making, using or selling surface mount transformers or devices that have an electronic surface mount package. In May 2013, the trial judge ruled on the legal determinations of Pulse's obviousness defense and the objective element of Halo's willfulness claim and entered judgment in favor of Halo, except on the issue of willfulness.
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Why is it that those who are best skilled at advocating for others are ill-equipped at advocating for their own skills and what to do about it?
There is no efficient market for the sale of bankruptcy assets. Inefficient markets yield a transactional drag, potentially dampening the ability of debtors and trustees to maximize value for creditors. This article identifies ways in which investors may more easily discover bankruptcy asset sales.
The DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.
Active reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.
With trillions of dollars to keep watch over, the last thing we need is the distraction of costly litigation brought on by patent assertion entities (PAEs or "patent trolls"), companies that don't make any products but instead seek royalties by asserting their patents against those who do make products.