Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
In two recent decisions, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("Federal Circuit") elaborated on the standards to be used when considering whether to award lost profit damages to a patent owner who has successfully shown validity and infringement. Both decisions were released by the Federal Circuit on Dec. 4, 2003. (<i>Ferguson Beauregard/Logic Controls, Div. of Dover Res., Inc. v. Mega Sys., LLC,</i> 350 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2003); and <i>Utah Med. Prods., Inc. v. Graphic Controls Corp.</i>, 350 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2003)). These cases should provide direction to patent owners, defendants, and their counsel when attempting to assert or defend against lost profits claims.
In 1963 the Supreme Court noted that patent applications "constitute one of the most difficult legal instruments to draw with accuracy." (<i>See Sperry v. Florida Ex. Rel. Florida Bar</i>, 373 U.S. 379, 383 (1963)). Recent decisions by both the Supreme Court and the Federal Circuit have made this task even more difficult. In particular, the Supreme Court's 2002 decision in <i>Festo v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd.</i> (535 U.S. 722) and the Federal Circuit's 2003 <i>Festo</i> remand decision, as well as the Federal Circuit's 2002 <i>Johnson & Johnston</i> (285 F. 3d 1046) (344 F. 3d 1359) decisions, all had significant narrowing effects on the doctrine of equivalents.
Features
In the world of franchising, mandatory arbitration contract provisions have become <i>de rigueur</i>. In principle, agreements to arbitrate favor neither party; as a practical matter, however, franchisors and franchisees have quickly learned about the real-life advantages and disadvantages of including an arbitration clause in a franchise contract. Generally, these clauses are included in franchise contracts because they tend to favor the franchisor — the party that, in most cases, usually has the bargaining power to impose terms and conditions on the weaker party, the franchisee. There are very few, if any, reported cases in which a franchisee challenging the validity of an arbitration clause has been shown to have requested or demanded that an arbitration clause be included in the franchise agreement.
Features
Highlights of the latest franchising news from around the country.
Features
Highlights of the latest franchising cases from around the country.
What happens when your client wants to build a mountain? Literally. And franchise the concept. That's exactly the challenge presented by the WaterSnoGo proposed franchise under development by M-O-H INCORPORATED.
Features
Ask any attorney in a specialized practice area to identify their most effective sources of new business, and you'll probably hear "referrals from other lawyers" listed as one of the best ways of meeting profitable new clients. One increasingly popular method of generating referrals from lawyers in other geographic areas is to participate in a law firm network or association.
Features
Advertising has been a consistent and critical component of Minneapolis-based Leonard, Street and Deinard's marketing plan for years. Currently a 180-attorney firm, in 1998 Leonard, Street and Deinard was one of the first business law firms in the Twin Cities to introduce a print advertising campaign, which ran primarily in local business and legal publications. As we looked to 2004, we knew we had to do something to break through the clutter. At the same time, we wanted to maximize the impact of our advertising communications while minimizing costs. Our advertising agency returned with an ambitious plan. They recommended that we no longer advertise in business and legal publications, instead concentrating our media buy in two new areas: a print media buy in the local business daily newspaper, and a television ad campaign. To say we were taken aback by the second recommendation is an understatement.
These are questions many industries have been asking themselves about the larger wires, and the legal world is starting to as well. The large wire services definitely have their place in the world of media relations. But, let's face it, you're not Microsoft. And, the legal news business can be a small world. There are only so many legal trades. In the wider media universe, most reporters and editors do not go to the big wires looking for story ideas or sources. In general, those releases issued on the big wires spin a corporate message, and are too processed to be of assistance to a reporter covering a particular legal issue. So, if the larger wires won't get you the media attention you want, what will?
A recent article in a legal publication stated, "there's a growing realization that money spent on branding campaigns hasn't paid off," referring in particular to the branding efforts of some large law firms. If this is true, what should your firm do about it? Should your firm jump on or off the "branding bandwagon"? How did branding become so prevalent?
