Features

Is This Really Patentable?
<b><i>Strategies to Defend Against Patent Claims by Raising Lack of Patentable Subject Matter in District Court Litigation</b></i><p>With the Supreme Court's decision in <i>Alice</i>, parties defending against a claim of patent infringement gained a potential way to find an early resolution to patent litigation.
Columns & Departments
IP News
Fed. Cir. Vacates Lack of Written Description Ruling In Interference<br>Federal Circuit Vacates Unclear Application of “Causal Nexus” Requirement to Prove Irreparable Harm
Features

The Impact of <i>TC Heartland</i> on Copyright Venue
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.
Features

<b><i>Online Extra</b></i><br> After Years of Setbacks, Patent Owners Try to Turn Tide in Congress
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.
Features

Patent Infringement
<b><i>Supreme Court Turns Back Clock</b></i><p>Although <i>TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods </i> 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.
Features

<b><i>Online Extra</b></i><br> Snap Accused of Infringing Patents With Snapchat Tech
A Texas company has accused Snap Inc. of infringing four patents with systems that allow Snapchat users to scan "Snapcodes" and add friends on the popular social networking app.
Columns & Departments
IP News
Federal Circuit Affirms Non-Infringement Decision Based on Prosecution Disclaimer<br>Federal Circuit Decisions Offer Guidance on Award of Attorney Fees under Section 285
Features
Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction In Landmark Patent Exhaustion Decision
The Supreme Court's decision in <i>Impression Products v. Lexmark</i> is the latest Supreme Court ruling to eviscerate years-long, patentee-friendly Federal Circuit precedent.
Features

Transactions Triggering the 35 USC §102 On-Sale Bar
Despite leaving unresolved the ambiguity about the effect of secret sales under §102, the <i>Helsinn</i> ruling offers clues to practitioners seeking to avoid the on-sale bar.
Features

Supreme Court Turns Back the Clock on Venue In Patent Infringement Litigation
Although <i>TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods</i> 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.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright LawsThis article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.Read More ›
- Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.Read More ›
- The Article 8 Opt InThe Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.Read More ›
- Cutting Off the Stream: How United States v. Silver Affects "Stream of Benefits" or "Retainer" BriberyAlthough the court stressed that, by vacating certain of former NY State Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver's counts of conviction, it was clarifying and not altering the "as opportunities arise" theory, it nevertheless emphasized that this theory requires particularity with respect to the "question or matter" that is the subject of the bribe payor and recipient's corrupt agreement.Read More ›