Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Since Jan. 1, 2010, over 130 cases have been filed that accuse defendants of false patent marking. This recent tidal wave of false marking litigation contrasts with the relative calm of the past in which only approximately 40 false patent marking cases total were filed from 2000'2009. What caused the underwater earthquake? The decision of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Forest Group, Inc. v. Bon Tool Co., 590 F.3d 1295 (2009).
On Dec. 28, 2009, the Federal Circuit handed down its decision in Forest Group, in which the Federal Circuit held that the false marking statute “requires” a fine of up to $500 for “each article.” Id. at 1301. Under this reading of the statute, just one act of false marking can potentially lead to devastating consequences. For example, if a company runs a single shift on an assembly line that manufactures, for instance, a thousand individual products per day marked with a patent number that does not in fact cover the product, that company could conceivably be liable for a $500,000 false marking penalty for each day of production.
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
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.
A trend analysis of the benefits and challenges of bringing back administrative, word processing and billing services to law offices.
Summary Judgment Denied Defendant in Declaratory Action by Producer of To Kill a Mockingbird Broadway Play Seeking Amateur Theatrical Rights
“Baseball arbitration” refers to the process used in Major League Baseball in which if an eligible player's representative and the club ownership cannot reach a compensation agreement through negotiation, each party enters a final submission and during a formal hearing each side — player and management — presents its case and then the designated panel of arbitrators chooses one of the salary bids with no other result being allowed. This method has become increasingly popular even beyond the sport of baseball.
'Disconnect Between In-House and Outside Counsel is a continuation of the discussion of client expectations and the disconnect that often occurs. And although the outside attorneys should be pursuing how inside-counsel actually think, inside counsel should make an effort to impart this information without waiting to be asked.