Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

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

The Place to Network: Working ' and Networking ' for a Cause

Christy Burke

By investing your time, skills and money in volunteer efforts, you stand to benefit your own morale, while also making and furthering contacts that can be extremely helpful to your legal career, both now and down the road.

Features

Law Firm Leadership: Giving Feedback

Mark Beese

The goal of feedback is improved performance. Teams committed to giving honest, constructive, thoughtful, feedback are intelligent, self-correcting and constantly improving their individual and team performance.

Features

Virtual Worlds

Jess M. Collen, Matthew C. Wagner & Oren Gelber

Given the rising popularity of virtual worlds and the ability to generate real-world income from activities within the virtual realm, it is not surprising that the virtual marketplace is thriving and that trademark and copyright infringements occur on a regular basis.

Announcing the Fifth Annual MLF 50

Elizabeth Anne 'Betiayn' Tursi

What a year it has been and now once again, it is time for law firm marketing and communications departments to start thinking about their submissions for consideration to earn a spot on the coveted MLF 50 ' The Top 50 Law Firms in Marketing and Communications.

Federal Circuit Puts Teeth in the 'Process' of Product-By-Process Claims

Timothy C. Bickham & Houda Morad

Is a "product by process" claim infringed by products that are made by other processes? After 17 years of waiting, the Federal Circuit emphatically answered the question: No; product-by-process claims are only infringed by products made using the claimed process. Although the law now appears to be clear, the strongly worded dissent questions the soundness of the ruling and warns of potentially far-reaching implications for the pharmaceutical and biotech industries.

Features

Prior Art Reference Need Not Disclose Claimed Invention's Utility

Kristin Connarn

Addressing the issue of whether a comprehensive reference listing of every relevant antisense oligodeoxynucleotide in a known nucleic acid sequence anticipates claims to specific antisense sequences, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that anticipation merely requires that the oligonucleotide sequence was in the prior art, not that its usefulness was previously disclosed.

Is Patent Marking an Issue?

Leigh J. Martinson

When choosing which claims to assert against an infringer, the traditional thought is "more is better." That is, many choose to assert any and every claim that passes the Rule 11 test. While this strategy is understandable and often the best course of action, it might not yield the best damages result.

Are Case Predictions Part of the Hypothetical Negotiation?

Michael D. Billok

Because a finding of patent infringement no longer automatically results in an injunction, courts have been struggling to determine the proper calculus for calculating post-verdict damages — or "ongoing royalty rates" — when the court declines to issue an injunction.

Upcoming Changes to European Patent Examination Procedures

Peter G. Pappas, William L. Warren & Kar Yee Tse

The new European Patent Office rules, which will be effective on April 1, 2010, will drastically restrict how a patent applicant is able to file divisional patent applications and will increase the patent applicant's obligations to provide information to the EPO during patent examination.

Verdicts

ALM Staff & Law Journal Newsletters

Recent rulings of interest to you and your practice.

Need Help?

  1. Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
  2. Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.

MOST POPULAR STORIES

  • Surveys in Patent Infringement Litigation: The Next Frontier
    Most experienced intellectual property attorneys understand the significant role surveys play in trademark infringement and other Lanham Act cases, but relatively few are likely to have considered the use of such research in patent infringement matters. That could soon change in light of the recent admission of a survey into evidence in <i>Applera Corporation, et al. v. MJ Research, Inc., et al.</i>, No. 3:98cv1201 (D. Conn. Aug. 26, 2005). The survey evidence, which showed that 96% of the defendant's customers used its products to perform a patented process, was admitted as evidence in support of a claim of inducement to infringe. The court admitted the survey into evidence over various objections by the defendant, who had argued that the inducement claim could not be proven without the survey.
    Read More ›
  • In the Spotlight
    On May 9, 2003, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the District of Massachusetts announced that Bayer Corporation, the pharmaceutical manufacturer, had been sentenced and ordered to pay a criminal fine of $5,590,800 stemming from its earlier plea of guilty to violating the Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act by failing to list with the FDA its drug product, Cipro, that was privately labeled for an HMO. Such listing is required under the federal Food, Drug &amp; Cosmetic Act. The Federal Prescription Drug Marketing Act, Pub. L. 100-293, enacted on April 22, 1988, as modified on August 26, 1992 by the Prescription Drug Amendments (PDA) Pub. L. 102-353, 106 Stat. 941, amended sections 301, 303, 503, and 801 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, codified at 21 U.S.C. '' 331, 333, 353, 381, to establish requirements for distributing prescription drug samples.
    Read More ›