Supreme Court Uproots Current PTAB Practice by Quashing Partial Decisions

By Trisha Farmer Lau and David G. Barker On April 24, 2018, in SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, the Supreme Court held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) must decide the validity of every patent claim challenged when it undertakes inter partes review under the America Invents Act (“AIA”).  In a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled in favor of SAS Institute, Inc., a software developer that filed an inter partes review petition and argued that the PTAB’s final decision must address all challenged claims in the petition. Before this decision, a U.S. Patent and Trademark Office regulation, 37   Read More »

Posted in Inter Partes Review, IP and Technology Litigation, Patent Litigation | Tagged , , , ,

Share this Article:

Supreme Court Confirms Inter Partes Review Is Constitutional

By Jacob C. Jones and David G. Barker In Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, the United States Supreme Court held today, in a 7-2 decision, that the inter partes review process under the America Invents Act (AIA), 35 U.S.C. § 100 et seq. (2011), does not violate Article III or the Seventh Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. As we noted previously, inter partes review is a popular administrative proceeding where the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB; part of the United States Patent and Trademark Office) decides whether challenged patents are valid.  As of March   Read More »

Posted in Inter Partes Review, IP and Technology Litigation, Patent Litigation, Post Grant Proceedings | Tagged , , , , , ,

Share this Article:

The Supreme Court to Consider Patent Infringement Damages Accrued Abroad

By Robert A. Clarke and David G. Barker The Supreme Court has granted certiorari to consider whether damages for infringement of a U.S. patent include lost profits resulting from activities outside the U.S. In WesternGeco L.L.C., v. Ion Geophysical Corporation, the Federal Circuit affirmed a jury verdict that Ion infringed WesternGeco’s patent for a device used to search for oil and gas beneath the ocean floor, but the Federal Circuit reversed an award of damages for lost profits.  The district court awarded lost profits from the use of the infringing devices abroad because WesternGeco would have been awarded the contracts   Read More »

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged ,

Share this Article:

Federal Circuit Clarifies Venue Waiver After TC Heartland

By Peter R. Montecuollo and David G. Barker The Federal Circuit issued guidance yesterday for district courts deciding venue challenges after the Supreme Court’s May 2017 decision in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC.  In In re Micron Technology, Inc., the Federal Circuit granted Micron Technology, Inc.’s petition for a writ of mandamus, holding that TC Heartland “changed the controlling law” by making available a venue defense that was not “available” to patent infringement defendants prior to the Supreme Court’s decision. In the wake of TC Heartland, Micron Technology moved to dismiss or transfer President and Fellows   Read More »

Posted in IP and Technology Litigation, Patent Litigation, Uncategorized | Tagged , ,

Share this Article:

District Courts Disagree on Venue-Waiver Issues After TC Heartland

By David G. Barker At the end of May this year, the Supreme Court unanimously clarified the law on venue in patent infringement lawsuits (see here). For 27 years, litigants had relied on a Federal Circuit decision, VE Holding Corp. v. Johnson Gas Appliance Co. (1990), that allowed patent owners to file suit virtually anywhere an infringing product was sold. In TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods Group Brands, the Supreme Court limited venue, and district courts are reaching different conclusions about whether litigants have waived venue arguments by not asserting them before TC Heartland. TC Heartland held that a 1957   Read More »

Posted in Patent Litigation | Tagged ,

Share this Article: