Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

Search

We found 1,293 results for "The Intellectual Property Strategist"...

Patent Lost Profit Damages and Apportionment
October 02, 2017
<b><i>Split Federal Circuit Declined to Reconsider Panel's Decision that Lost Profits Based on the</i> Panduit <i>Factors Are Fully Apportioned</b></i><p>On Sept. 1, 2017, a split Federal Circuit declined to rehear a panel decision in <i>Mentor Graphics Corp. v. EVE-USA, Inc.</i>, a case that could have significant implications for lost profit damages and apportionment.
Qualcomm Slammed In Patent Brawl With Apple
October 02, 2017
Qualcomm Inc. lost two pretrial skirmishes last month in its patent and antitrust battle against Apple Inc. — in just about every way imaginable.
Tactical Considerations for Patent Owner Responses in IPRs
October 02, 2017
U.S. Patent Office statistics show that the PTAB has found at least one claim of a challenged patent to be unpatentable in over 80% of IPRs. Given these odds, and the fact that institution of an IPR is not appealable, a patent owner's best shot at preserving its patent rights intact is to defeat institution of the IPR trial in the first instance.
Trade Secrets Litigation: The No-Longer-Forgotten Part of the Tech IP Arsenal
October 02, 2017
<b><i>With Massive Jury Rewards and the DTSA Encouraging Federal Litigation, Trade Secrets Litigation Is Seeing a Surge in the Tech Industry</b></i><p>These days, many of the big IP litigation battles involving companies like Facebook, Uber, and Epic, have nothing to do with patents, trademarks or copyrights at all. Instead, it's all about the perhaps forgotten part of IP: trade secrets.
IP News
October 02, 2017
Federal Circuit Throws Out District Court's Test for “Place of Business” for Purposes of Determining Venue in Patent Cases
On the Move
October 02, 2017
Kobre &amp; Kim LLP announced that Daniel Saval has joined the firm's cross-border insolvency litigation practice as a partner in the New York office.…
Is This Really Patentable?
September 02, 2017
<b><i>Strategies to Defend Against Patent Claims by Raising Lack of Patentable Subject Matter in District Court Litigation</b></i><p>With the Supreme Court's decision in <i>Alice</i>, parties defending against a claim of patent infringement gained a potential way to find an early resolution to patent litigation.
The Uses of Prior Conduct in Copyright Cases
September 02, 2017
<b><i>The Lessons of History</b></i><p>In the context of a copyright case, a defendant's prior bad acts and prior conduct are more useful to a plaintiff than is typical in civil litigation.
IP News
September 02, 2017
Fed. Cir. Vacates Lack of Written Description Ruling In Interference<br>Federal Circuit Vacates Unclear Application of “Causal Nexus” Requirement to Prove Irreparable Harm
<i>Matal v. Tam</i> and Viewpoint-Discriminatory Prohibitions Against Federal Registration
August 01, 2017
In <i>Matal v. Tam,</i> the SCOTUS held that a portion of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. §1052(a), prohibiting the federal registration of potentially disparaging trademarks and service marks, violated the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Navigating the Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Doctrine in Bankruptcy
    When a company declares bankruptcy, avoidance actions under Chapter 5 of the Bankruptcy Code can assist in securing extra cash for the debtor's dwindling estate. When a debtor-in-possession does not pursue these claims, creditors' committees often seek the bankruptcy court's authorization to pursue them on behalf of the estate. Once granted such authorization through a “standing order,” a creditors' committee is said to “stand in the debtor's shoes” because it has permission to litigate certain claims belonging to the debtor that arose before bankruptcy. However, for parties whose cases advance to discovery, such a standing order may cause issues by leaving undecided the allocation of attorney-client privilege and work product protection between the debtor and committee.
    Read More ›
  • Revised Proposal: Understanding the Interagency Statement on Complex Structured Finance Activities
    Many U.S. financial institutions that have participated in equipment leasing transactions (particularly in the large-ticket and municipal markets) in the last 20 years will be keenly aware that as the structures grew ever more complicated, Congress and the federal regulatory agencies grew intensely interested. Whether the institution had a major role in the transaction or simply provided a service, some degree of scrutiny could be expected, often in conjunction with a tax audit of its client. The risks to financial institutions from participating in complex structured finance transactions of all types became a source for concern for banking and securities regulators. The principal federal regulators responded in 2004 with a proposal that financial institutions investigate, and bear responsibility for evaluating, the legal, tax, and accounting basis of their clients' complex structured finance transactions. The goal: to limit the institutions' own credit, legal, and reputational risk from such participation.
    Read More ›