We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
In cooperation with Association of Corporate Counsel
  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 238

False marking update: the beginning of the end or the end of the beginning?

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • April 29 2011

In late 2009, the Federal Circuit’s unexpected opinion in Forest Group, Inc. v. Bon Tool Co. spawned a flood of false marking cases

Kraft sues Kellogg & Keebler alleging packaging patent infringement

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • January 18 2013

Kraft Foods Global Brands LLC has filed a complaint in an Illinois federal court against Kellogg and Keebler, claiming that the companies' cookie

House bill would impose litigation costs on losing non-practicing entities

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • March 7 2013

U.S. Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah) have introduced legislation (H.R. 845) that would create a "loser pays" system in

What to do until the life guard arrives: false marking claims after Forest Group. and Solo Cup (part II)

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • June 23 2010

Just when we thought it was safe to go back in the water another court decision stirs up the false-marking sharks

Not-so-expert options? Daubert challenges abound in Apple Inc. v. Motorola , Inc

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • July 29 2014

Are we experiencing a "damages free-for-all," or is it "business as usual" with damages opin- ions? The spike in challenges to damages experts has

What's behind the curtain? Exposing the case up front with Twombly and Iqbal

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • August 4 2010

For decades, litigants essentially had a free ride, comforting themselves that "notice pleading" required only "a short and plain statement of the claim."

Federal Circuit finds no limitation on new evidence in civil patent actions filed in district court

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • November 18 2010

A divided en banc Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that patent applicants who are dissatisfied with a Board of Patent Appeals (Board) determination and decide to pursue their claims in federal court under 35 U.S.C. 145, face no limitations on the right to introduce new evidence other than those pertaining to all civil actions under federal evidentiary and procedural rules

Federal Circuit upholds sanctions against plaintiff and counsel

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 16 2010

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has denied a motion seeking to stay an award of $631,000 in sanctions and fees against a company and its counsel for bringing a baseless infringement claim involving an information processing methodology

USPTO seeks comments on rules for ex parte patent appeals

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 16 2010

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued a notice of proposed rulemaking that seeks public comments on proposed new revisions to current procedures governing practice before the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences

Ghost of claims past: a short refresher on Jepson claims

  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • -
  • USA
  • -
  • December 14 2010

We round up the year with a pop-quiz about Jepson claims