In 2013, the PTO adopted a new policy under which any party commencing a de novo proceeding challenging a PTO decision would be responsible to pay a pro rata share of the salaries of the government attorneys working on the matter. On Dec. 11, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the PTO’s new interpretation of the Patent Act and held that the American Rule, a centuries-old principle under which each party bears its own attorneys’ fees, does apply to this statute.
Shaleen J. Patel
Do Not Pass Go? U.S. Supreme Court to Review Federal Circuit’s Finding of Justiciability
This article discusses the jurisprudence applied to determining patent eligibility of claims for diagnostic methods, and the expectation for changes in analysis of patent eligibility under §101 in the near future.
Joshua R. Stein and Jeff Ginsberg
Federal Circuit Holds PTAB Judges Unconstitutional, Constructs a Fix—But Not All Judges Agree on What Happens Next
Some of China’s largest companies have banded together with major brands in the United States and elsewhere to neutralize “patent trolls,” an indication that the country’s firms are becoming increasingly concerned about patent infringement litigation.
George Soussou and Jeff Ginsberg
More Than a Recitation of Hooke’s Law Needed for Patent Protection
A Claim for a Chair Limits the Claim to a Chair
Stacey C. Kalamaras
This summer, the Madrid System turned 30 years old, and as two more countries prepare to join the Madrid Protocol we look at how the Madrid System has grown as it enters full adulthood.
Nicole D. Galli
Now that we are in the digital age, questions have been raised about the trade dress of websites and apps.
A look at the gray area of infringement of U.S. patents in the U.S., but with related consequences or actions outside the U.S.
The owner of a commercially successful patent may have competing desires. On one hand, the patent owner wants to protect the patent and secure its maximum benefit; on the other hand, the patent owner wants to avoid enforcement litigation with competitors because it is expensive and puts the patent at risk.