Brooks Kushman Shareholders Frank Angileri and Marc Lorelli
discuss several recent Court decisions that will have the greatest
impact on intellectual property law. During the second quarter of
2016, the U.S. Supreme Court and Federal Circuit issued several
significant IP rulings, including decisions that will affect
on-going discussions concerning important patent issues.
The webinar reviews and provide practical guidance on:
Enhanced Damages and Willful Infringement in Patent Cases: In
Halo Electronics, Inc. v. Pulse Electronics, Inc., 136 S.
Ct. 1923 (June 13, 2016), the Supreme Court rejected the Federal
Circuit's Seagate Technology standard for willful infringement
and gave district courts broad discretion to award enhanced damages
to patent infringement plaintiffs. The ruling will require many
litigants to reassess their trial strategies.
Federal Circuit Continues to Refine Alice/Mayo Test: In a
series of important cases, the Federal Circuit continued to apply
the Supreme Court's Alice/Mayo framework for assessing patent
eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The decisions in Rapid Litigation Management Ltd. v.
CellzDirect, Inc., No. 2015-1570 (Fed. Cir. July 05, 2016);
Bascom Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility
LLC, No. 2015-1763 (Fed. Cir. June 27, 2016); and Enfish, LLC
v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2016) may signal new
avenues for establishing patent eligibility.
Supreme Court Decides First AIA Case: In Cuozzo Speed
Techs., LLC v. Lee, 136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016), the Supreme Court
considered the USPTO's AIA trial procedures, including the
correct claim construction standard to be used in inter
partes review proceedings and the appealability of decisions
to institute review.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
In Wasica Finance GmbH v. Continental Automotive Systems, Inc., No. 15-2078 (Fed. Cir. 2017), the patentee Wasica Finance discovered, among other things, the importance of using consistent terminology in the patent specification and claims.
While under attack for several years now, the patent infringement defense of laches was dealt a serious, and likely final, blow by the recent Supreme Court case of SCA Hygiene Products AB et al. v. First Quality Baby Products LLC et al.
Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C.
On April 6, 2017, the Federal Circuit reversed-in-part and affirmed-in-part the district court's judgment of infringement and summary judgment for non-infringement of The Medicines Company's ("MedCo") patents-in-suit.
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).