Features
Combatting Patent Trolls
A subject of extensive debate within the U.S. patent system has been the classification of “patent trolls” — most widely defined as individuals or companies that acquire patents solely for the purpose of assertion, often in cases without any merit, but which leverage the high cost of patent litigation defense to force small settlements.
Features
The Federal Circuit Clarifies Who Can Be an Expert In Patent Cases
In September 2024, the Federal Circuit clarified the necessary qualifications for a technical expert to testify in a patent lawsuit, holding that while an expert must possess ordinary skill in the art, they need not have possessed such skill "at the time of the alleged invention."
Columns & Departments
IP News
Federal Circuit: Falsely Claiming That a Product Feature is Patented Can Give Rise to a False Advertising Claim Under the Lanham Act Federal Circuit: A Prior Decision in an IPR Does Not Collaterally Estop the Patentee in a Subsequent Litigation Where Invalidity Must be Proven by 'Clear and Convincing Evidence'
Features
LJN Quarterly Update: 2024 Q3
The LJN Quarterly Update highlights some of the articles from the nine LJN Newsletters titles over the quarter. Articles include in-depth analysis and insights from lawyers and other practice area experts.
Features
Federal Circuit Decision Clarifies Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Patent Term Adjustments In Allergan v. MSN Laboratories
On August 13, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling that reversed the District of Delaware's application of the Federal Circuit precedent in In re: Cellect to invalidate a claim in an earlier-filed parent application over admittedly patentably indistinct claims in later-filed (and earlier-expired) child patents. This decision has resolved some substantial questions about the application of obviousness-type double patenting that had been raised by last year's In re Cellect decision.
Columns & Departments
IP News
Federal Circuit: Affirms Preliminary Injunction on Cancer Assays Federal Circuit: Affirms Judgment of Unpatentability on the Pleadings for Claims Directed to Method of Assisting an Investigator in Conducting a Background Investigation
Features
Idaho District Court Imposes First-Ever Bond Order Under the State's Bad Faith Assertions of Patent Infringement Act
The Act is intended to guard against patent trolling and creates a private cause of action for those targeted by bad faith infringement assertions and contemplates two types of relief: remedies and a bond requirement.
Features
LJN Quarterly Update: 2024 Q2
The LJN Quarterly Update highlights some of the articles from the nine LJN Newsletters titles over the quarter. Articles include in-depth analysis and insights from lawyers and other practice area experts.
Columns & Departments
IP News
Federal Circuit Sitting en banc Overrules Long-standing Test for Assessing Obviousness of Design Patents and Adopts the Same Framework Established for Utility Patents Federal Circuit Affirms District Court's Grant of §285 Fees Request for Fees Incurred in Litigation and Denial of Fees Request for Fees Incurred In a Parallel IPR Proceeding
Features
Federal Circuit Overrules 'Rosen-Durling' Test for Design Patent Obviousness
The downfall of the Rosen-Durling test will generally make it harder to obtain design patents and easier to invalidate design patents.
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
- Understanding the Potential Pitfalls Arising From Participation in Standards BodiesChances are that if your company is involved in research and development of new technology there is a standards setting organization exploring the potential standardization of such technology. While there are clear benefits to participation in standards organizations — keeping abreast of industry developments, targeting product development toward standard compliant products, steering research and intellectual property protection into potential areas of future standardization — such participation does not come without certain risks. Whether you are in-house counsel or outside counsel, you may be called upon to advise participants in standard-setting bodies about intellectual property issues or to participate yourself. You may also be asked to review patent policy of the standard-setting body that sets forth the disclosure and notification requirements with respect to patents for that organization. Here are some potential patent pitfalls that can catch the unwary off-guard.Read More ›
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.Read More ›
- A Lawyer's System for Active ReadingActive reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.Read More ›
