Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Features

Leveraging Patent Office Examples for AI Enabled Innovation In Any Industry Image

Leveraging Patent Office Examples for AI Enabled Innovation In Any Industry

Jim Soong

In Ex parte Michalek, the PTAB evaluated an invention involving medical health technology and artificial intelligence. While this case involved medical health technology, the implicated issues inform patent strategies for AI enabled inventions across all industries.

Features

Divided Over Damages: Courts Split On Whether Failure to Mark Precludes All, or Only Some, Pre-Suit Damages Image

Divided Over Damages: Courts Split On Whether Failure to Mark Precludes All, or Only Some, Pre-Suit Damages

Cason Cole & Mark Liang

Only a few district courts have addressed the failure to mark in recent years — but they’ve reached directly opposing conclusions. This article analyzes the conflicting authorities and their reasoning, and it provides guidance to litigants on best practices given the conflict between district courts.

Features

Patent Policing: Federal Circuit Upholds District Courts’ Inherent Authority to Sanction Party Conduct Image

Patent Policing: Federal Circuit Upholds District Courts’ Inherent Authority to Sanction Party Conduct

Jeff Lesovitz & Katie Schuyler

In recent decisions, the Federal Circuit affirmed the inherent powers of district courts to investigate and address potential party misconduct in patent litigations, including suspected fraud and bad faith conduct. This article delves into these key cases that upheld district courts’ policing by standing orders or sanctions and underscore the importance of transparency and proper conduct in patent litigation.

Features

Swearing Behind: Overcoming Asserted Prior Art in PTAB Proceedings, Part 2 Image

Swearing Behind: Overcoming Asserted Prior Art in PTAB Proceedings, Part 2

Emily J. Roberts, Ph.D. & Adam R. Brausa

This two-part article discusses the various legal and evidentiary requirements for antedating and removing prior art that patent owners should consider when their pre-AIA patents are challenged based on a prior art publication or activity that is not otherwise subject to a statutory bar. Part One led off with a discussion of the legal requirements for antedating prior art by establishing an earlier invention via: 1) conception and diligent reduction to practice; and 2) actual reduction to practice. Part Two discusses the legal requirements for removing prior art that discloses an inventor’s own work and the evidentiary requirements for swearing behind prior art.

Features

Patent Strategy Tips from Fed. Circ. 'Kroy v. Groupon' Ruling on Collateral Estoppel Image

Patent Strategy Tips from Fed. Circ. 'Kroy v. Groupon' Ruling on Collateral Estoppel

Cory G. Smith & George C. Chen & Ellen Komlos

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently addressed the usage of the doctrine of collateral estoppel in patent infringement cases. Specifically, the court considered whether a finding of invalidity of claims by the PTAB at an inter partes review could be used to estop a patent holder from asserting patent infringement of different claims of the same patent in district court litigation.

Features

The 5 Most Influential Patent Law Cases of 2024 Image

The 5 Most Influential Patent Law Cases of 2024

Monica Arnold & Michelle Armond

We’re counting down to the new year with a recap of the five most influential patent decisions from 2024. Spanning damages, design patents, infringement loopholes, issue preclusion, and prior art disqualification, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had an active year issuing cases with a direct impact on innovation. With several of these decisions currently on appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, 2025 is shaping up to bring even more change.

Features

The 5 Most Influential Patent Law Cases of 2024 Image

The 5 Most Influential Patent Law Cases of 2024

Monica Arnold & Michelle Armond

We’re counting down to the new year with a recap of the five most influential patent decisions from 2024. Spanning damages, design patents, infringement loopholes, issue preclusion, and prior art disqualification, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit had an active year issuing cases with a direct impact on innovation.

Features

Combatting Patent Trolls Image

Combatting Patent Trolls

Rob Maier

A subject of extensive debate within the U.S. patent system has been the classification of “patent trolls” — most widely defined as individuals or companies that acquire patents solely for the purpose of assertion, often in cases without any merit, but which leverage the high cost of patent litigation defense to force small settlements.

Features

The Federal Circuit Clarifies Who Can Be an Expert In Patent Cases Image

The Federal Circuit Clarifies Who Can Be an Expert In Patent Cases

Jim Day & Raven Quesenberry

In September 2024, the Federal Circuit clarified the necessary qualifications for a technical expert to testify in a patent lawsuit, holding that while an expert must possess ordinary skill in the art, they need not have possessed such skill "at the time of the alleged invention."

Columns & Departments

IP News Image

IP News

Jeff Ginsberg & Ryan J. Sheehan

Federal Circuit: Falsely Claiming That a Product Feature is Patented Can Give Rise to a False Advertising Claim Under the Lanham Act Federal Circuit: A Prior Decision in an IPR Does Not Collaterally Estop the Patentee in a Subsequent Litigation Where Invalidity Must be Proven by 'Clear and Convincing Evidence'

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • The 'Sophisticated Insured' Defense
    A majority of courts consider the <i>contra proferentem</i> doctrine to be a pillar of insurance law. The doctrine requires ambiguous terms in an insurance policy to be construed against the insurer and in favor of coverage for the insured. A prominent rationale behind the doctrine is that insurance policies are usually standard-form contracts drafted entirely by insurers.
    Read More ›
  • Abandoned and Unused Cables: A Hidden Liability Under the 2002 National Electric Code
    In an effort to minimize the release of toxic gasses from cables in the event of fire, the 2002 version of the National Electric Code ("NEC"), promulgated by the National Fire Protection Association, sets forth new guidelines requiring that abandoned cables must be removed from buildings unless they are located in metal raceways or tagged "For Future Use." While the NEC is not, in itself, binding law, most jurisdictions in the United States adopt the NEC by reference in their state or local building and fire codes. Thus, noncompliance with the recent NEC guidelines will likely mean that a building is in violation of a building or fire code. If so, the building owner may also be in breach of agreements with tenants and lenders and may be jeopardizing its fire insurance coverage. Even in jurisdictions where the 2002 NEC has not been adopted, it may be argued that the guidelines represent the standard of reasonable care and could result in tort liability for the landlord if toxic gasses from abandoned cables are emitted in a fire. With these potential liabilities in mind, this article discusses: 1) how to address the abandoned wires and cables currently located within the risers, ceilings and other areas of properties, and 2) additional considerations in the placement and removal of telecommunications cables going forward.
    Read More ›