Call 855-808-4530 or email GroupSales@alm.com to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Is inter partes review of a patent grant compatible with Article III and the Seventh Amendment? That was the question presented in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group and the U.S. Supreme Court answered in the affirmative.
Is inter partes review of a patent grant compatible with Article III and the Seventh Amendment? That was the question presented in Oil States Energy Services v. Greene’s Energy Group, No. 16-712 (April 24, 2018) and the U.S. Supreme Court answered in the affirmative. In a 7–2 decision authored by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Court held that a patent grant is a “public right” and thus may be modified or revoked by the executive branch without going through full-dress judicial proceedings in the federal courts. As a result, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) can continue to reassess and nix mistakenly granted patents at relatively low cost to challengers.
By David S. Gold
Branding is not a new concept, nor are the various intellectual property laws that protect brands. What is new to most is how this burgeoning industry can take advantage of those laws within the context of state and federal restrictions.
By Tom Gushue
The owner of a commercially successful patent may have competing desires. On one hand, the patent owner wants to protect the patent and secure its maximum benefit; on the other hand, the patent owner wants to avoid enforcement litigation with competitors because it is expensive and puts the patent at risk.
By Glenn E.J. Murphy
Many observers greeted the passage of the AIA into law as a long-overdue overhaul of U.S. patent law that aligned it with patent systems prevailing in the rest of the world. Who knew what mischief just seven of the AIA’s more than 25,000 words contained? The U.S. Supreme Court answered earlier this year.
By Norman C. Simon and Patrick J. Campbell
The decision in Romag Fasteners v. Fossil will bring welcome uniformity, ending the status quo where eligibility to recover profits under the Lanham Act depends on which court is deciding the dispute