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.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 99

Federal Circuit explores when litigation is “reasonably foreseeable” for spoliation purposes
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 19 2011

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has issued rulings in companion patent-infringement cases involving the alleged spoliation of documents; at issue was a determination as to when litigation is "reasonably foreseeable," thus triggering a document-preservation duty


Eighth Circuit says pleadings can be filed under seal, but needs more justification
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • February 21 2013

The Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that a federal district court did not abuse its discretion in sealing an antitrust complaint


SCOTUS sides with FTC in reverse payment deals
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

A divided U.S. Supreme Court has determined that patent-infringement settlement agreements requiring the patentee to pay the claimed infringer


Researchers conclude costs of litigation growing in relation to benefits of patent protections
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

Economics, law and technology scholars affiliated with U.S. and German institutions have issued a paper that examines data on the costs of patent


En banc Federal Circuit issues ruling on appellate jurisdiction over patent infringement issues
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • June 20 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals en banc has determined that parties may appeal the liability issues in a patent infringement action even if the


Federal Circuit addresses pleading standards for patent infringement claims
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 2 2013

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that a federal district court erred by relying on an incorrect pleading standard in dismissing


Control at issue in split Federal Circuit ruling on joint infringement
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • April 21 2011

A divided Federal Circuit Court of Appeals panel, relying on recent precedent, has confirmed that "where the actions of multiple parties combine to perform every step of a claimed method, the claim is directly infringed only if one party exercises 'control or direction' over the entire process such that every step is attributable to the controlling party."


U.S. Supreme Court hears argument on patent rights under Bayh-Dole Act
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • March 10 2011

A dispute pitting a university against a biotech company over rights to a patent purportedly assigned to the company by the university researcher working on the technology was recently heard by the U.S. Supreme Court. Bd. of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior Univ. v. Roche Molecular Sys., Inc., No. 09-1159 (U.S., argued February 28, 2011


False-marking law under assault in the courtroom
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • March 10 2011

A federal court in Ohio has granted a defendant's motion to dismiss a case involving claims for false marking after finding the qui tam provision in the false-marking statute unconstitutional


Federal Circuit confirms jurisdiction over malpractice claim against patent law firm
  • Shook Hardy & Bacon LLP
  • USA
  • May 17 2012

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has determined that a patent holder did not introduce sufficient evidence to prove that hypothetical alternative patent claims would have been patentable and thus, as a matter, of law, could not show that the law firm which prepared his patent committed malpractice by drafting the claims “so narrowly as to offer virtually no protection against competitors, resulting in lost-sale damages.”