ARE Patent Law Alert:
Supreme Court Rejects “Insolubly Ambiguous†Standard For Claim Indefiniteness Analysis
On June 2, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously rejected the Federal Circuit’s “insolubly ambiguous” standard in evaluating a patent claim’s definiteness under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2. Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc., No. 13-369, 574 U.S. __ (June 2, 2014). The Supreme Court criticized this formulation because it “can breed lower court […]
In The Press: IP Law 360 turns to partner Charles R. Macedo for insight on Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter Int’l, Inc.
The Baxter decision encourages accused infringers to come up with ways to delay litigation to give the USPTO more time to invalidate the patent, driving up litigation costs, said Charles Macedo of Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP. “It’s saying that if you challenge long enough, the PTO may come to the rescue,” he said. The […]
ARE Patent Law Alert:
Supreme Court Reverses Akamai On Inducement But Leaves Open The Question Of Divided, Direct Infringement
(June 2, 2014) The U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Limelight Networks, Inc. v. Akamai Technologies, Inc. et al., 572 U.S. __ (June 2, 2014) (“Limelight”). reversing and remanding the leading Federal Circuit case on induced infringement under 35 USC § 271(b). Under the Federal Circuit’s analysis, in order to establish direct infringement […]
Lessons From The 1st Year Of Post-Grant Proceedings
Law360, New York (November 06, 2013, 2:59 PM ET) — A little over one year ago, the America Invents Act implemented new methods for third parties to challenge the validity of issued patents by having a contested validity trial in the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Specifically, the AIA replaced inter partes re-examinations with inter […]
ARE Copyright Law Alert:
Supreme Court Limit Laches For Copyright Claims
On May 19, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, held that while laches cannot be invoked to bar a plaintiff’s claim for damages brought within Copyright Act’s three-year statute of limitations, there may be “extraordinary circumstances” where laches may limit equitable relief. In holding so, the Court reversed the Ninth Circuit Court […]
ARE Patent Law Alert:USPTO Issues A Final Rule to Implement the Patent Law Treaty
On October 21, 2013, the USPTO published a final rule in the Federal Register to implement the provisions of the Patent Law Treaty (PLT) in accordance with the Patent Law Treaties Implementation Act of 2012. The PLT is a multilateral treaty adopted by World Intellectual Property Organization in June of 2000 to harmonize certain patent […]
ARE Patent Law Alert:
Supreme Court Relaxes Standards for Awarding Attorney Fees Under 35 U.S.C. § 285 in Patent Cases
On April 29, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two decisions which overturned the Federal Circuit’s jurisprudence on awarding attorney fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Octane Fitness, LLC v. Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., No. 12-1184 (Apr. 29, 2014); Highmark Inc. v. Allcare Health Mgmt. Sys., Inc., No. 12-1163 (Apr. 29, 2014). Section 285 […]
ARE Patent Litigation Alert:
Judge Robinson of District of Delaware Implements Revised Patent Case Scheduling Order
(April 2, 2014) On March 24, 2014, Judge Sue L. Robinson of the United States District Court for the District of Delaware notified counsel of record on patent cases currently on her docket that she is implementing a revised patent case scheduling order. As a result of feedback gained through “lively and informative discussions” via […]
What Every Start Up Should Know about Intellectual Property Law
Every new business venture or product line has, at its root, an idea that makes it special, which is intended to distinguish the new venture from other competitive offerings already in the market or coming to the market. Identifying what differentiates a venture or product line, and the right type of intellectual property that can […]
ARE Trademark Law Alert:
Supreme Court Outlines Rules for Standing to Sue Under the Lanham Act
Lexmark Int’l, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc., No. 12-873 (March 25, 2014). On March 25, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 9-0 decision, ruled that Static Control Components Inc. had the right to sue Lexmark International Inc. for disparaging its business. In the process, the Supreme Court settled a wide circuit split by […]