The Supreme Court sparked a seismic shift in patent litigation recently when it upset the long-standing interpretation of 28 U.S.C. §1400(b), the special patent venue statute. TC Heartland held that for the purposes of patent venue, the meaning of "resides" in Section 1400(b) is not supplemented by the broad definition of "resides" in the general venue provision, 28 U.S.C. §1391.
The Third Circuit has adopted McCarthy's "ownership" test in determining whether a manufacturer or distributor owns a trademark in the absence of an express agreement between the parties.
Federal Circuit Vacated The Denial of an Injunction Because a Causal Nexus for Multi-Feature Products Only Requires a Feature to be 'A Driver' of Demand
District Court Abused Discretion In Denying Attorneys' Fees, Where Plaintiff Continued to Litigate After Markman Order Made Its Position Untenable
Patent owners have taken control of the patent reform debate in the 115th Congress, but it's not clear yet who's supposed to be listening.
Since 2007, the development of the musical has been the source of protracted litigation that reached its latest stage in June 2017.
Supreme Court Turns Back Clock
Although TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods answers the question of where a domestic corporation resides in patent infringement cases, it does not fully answer the question of where proper venue lies.
Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement Decision Based on Prosecution Disclaimer
Federal Circuit Decisions Offer Guidance on Award of Attorney Fees under Section 285
The Supreme Court's decision in Impression Products v. Lexmark is the latest Supreme Court ruling to eviscerate years-long, patentee-friendly Federal Circuit precedent.
Despite leaving unresolved the ambiguity about the effect of secret sales under §102, the Helsinn ruling offers clues to practitioners seeking to avoid the on-sale bar.
Michelle Lee resigned as director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on May 6.
